SHIVRAJ BAI Vs. SHYAMLAL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS is a revision filed by the landlady under Section 23-E of M. P. Accommodation Control Act (for short "act") against an order dated 26-2-2000, passed by learned Rent Controlling Authority, Indore in Eviction Case no. 31-90 (7)/1/97. Facts in brief are these.

(2.) PETITIONER is a landlord as defined under Section 23-J of the Act. It is in this capacity, ie. , landlord falling in the special category of landlords as defined under Section 23- J ibid, the petitioner filed an application claiming respondents eviction from the suit accommodation under Section 23-A of the act. The eviction was claimed on the ground of her personal residential need. It was also contended that she has no other reasonably suitable alternative accommodation of her own in city and hence, need to claim eviction of the respondent from the suit accommodation. The defence was that of denial of petitioners title to the suit house, tenancy and need. In other words, the respondent as non-applicant in the application denied petitioner's ownership over the suit house, and in consequence also denied the relationship of landlord and tenant inter se them. The respondent then asserted ownership of himself over the suit house and contended that application for eviction be dismissed on these grounds taken in defence. The learned R. C. A. (Rent controlling Authority) by his long order running in 18 pages dismissed the application essentially or rather one of the main ground that petitioner has failed to establish her ownership over the suit property. It is against this dismissal, the landlady has come up in revision.

(3.) HEARD Shri S. M. Sanyal, learned Counsel for the petitioner. None for the respondents.