LALJI Vs. DEEPAK KUMAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS appeal is by the defendants, which was admitted on the following substantial question of law:-

(2.) THE facts giving rise to filing of the appeal briefly stated are that the plaintiff filed the suit on the ground that he is owner of suit shop which was let out to defendants on a monthly rent of Rs.250/- on 15.6.1984. It was pleaded that the defendants are in arrears of rent for a period from 15.7.1986 to 15.7.1987, and since October, 1986, the defendants have not used the suit shop. The suit shop is in dilapidated condition and the repairs in the same cannot be carried out without getting the accommodation vacated. Accordingly, the suit for eviction was filed.

(3.) BEING aggrieved by the decree, the plaintiff preferred an appeal which was registered as First Appeal No.17-A/1994 whereas the appeal preferred by the defendants was registered as First Appeal No.16-A/1994. Both the appeals were decided by the Appellate Court by a common judgment dated 20 t h September, 1996. The Lower Appellate Court interalia held that the defendant No.1 namely Prakash Chand has admitted his signature on the agreement for rent (Ex.P/13). It was further held that the notice Ex.P/3 was sent demanding arrears of rent and the trial Court itself has found that defendants were in arrears of rent for a period from 15 t h July, 1986 to 15 t h July, 1987. Accordingly, the decree under section 12 (1)(a) of the M.P. Accommodation Control Act, 1961 (hereinafter in short referred to as "the Act") was granted by the Lower Appellate Court however findings of the trial Court on the remaining issues was affirmed.