MUNISHI KHAN Vs. MAYA DEVI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS appeal came up for hearing before R.C. Lahoti, J., who found an apparent conflict between the view taken in the three decisions rendered by learned Single Judges of this Court on the question mooted in the appeal. The matter, thereafter, came up before a Division Bench of which he was also a member. However, he found unable to persuade himself to agree with the Presiding Judge [S.K. Dubey, J.] and as a result of difference of opinion between them, the controversy is to be finally resolved by me.

(2.) THIS is defendant's second appeal. Two Courts have decreed the suit of the plaintiff/respondent for his eviction on the "ground" contemplated under Section 12(1)(e) of the M.P. Accommodation Control Act, 1961, for short, the 'Act'. The plaintiff's case was that she had purchased the suit premises on 18.9.1972 from one Noor Beg but she did not get vacant possession as the defendant was occupying the same as Noor Beg's tenant. After her purchase, for defendant's eviction, she instituted the suit on 25.6.1973 basing her claim on clauses (e) and (o) of Section 12(1). During the trial of the suit, on 10.4.1.980, para 6-A was inserted in the plaint to add further the "ground" contemplated under clause (e) of Section 12(1). The short question surfaced for decision in this Reference is the effect of the said amendment on defendant's rights and interests in the suit premises and on the validity of the decree passed accepting plaintiffs claim for his eviction on the "ground" incorporated by that amendment.

(3.) FIRST , it is necessary to extract relevant portions of Section 12 of the Act -