NAVEEN CHANDRA Vs. LOKUMAL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) BEING aggrieved by order dated 3-4-99, passed by R. C. A. Burhanpur, in Case No. 5-A/90. . . 97-98, disallowing the application under Section 23-A of the M. P. Accommodation Control Act (hereinafter be referred as 'act'), applicant/landlord has preferred this revision under Section 23-E of the Act.

(2.) FACTS in brief are, late Chhaganlal Mehta was owner of the suit house No. 17, Ward No. 12, Itwara, Burhanpur. Non-applicant Lokumal was inducted into the tenancy of the ground floor of this house (hereinafter be referred as 'suit house') on a monthly rent of Rs. 21/ -. After some time, the first floor of the suit house had also come in possession of non-applicant. Natwarlal, son of late Chhaganlal Mehta executed a registered sale deed dated 18-2-87 in favour of applicant Naveen Chandra. Since then non-applicant Lokumal became tenant of applicant in the suit house on a monthly rent of Rs. 217- P. M. Applicant was in the service of the State of Maharashtra and had retired. Applicant's father and other family members are resident of Burhanpur. His son is residing at Yavatmal (Maharashtra ). Applicant filed application under Section 23-A of the Act seeking relief of eviction of tenant Lokumal on the ground that suit house is bona fide required by him for occupation as residence for himself and family members and he has no other reasonable, suitable residential accommodation of his own at Burhanpur. This application before the RCA, Burhanpur was registered as case No. 5-A/90. . . 97-98. Non-applicant Lokumal resisted the claim and stated that applicant Naveen Chandra is not a retired employee of the State of Maharashtra and does not require bona fide the suit house for occupation as residence for himself. He has other reasonable, suitable residential accommodation of his own at Burhanpur. The suit house was purchased by him vide registered sale-deed dated 18-2-87 after the retirement from service. RCA vide impugned order dated 3-4-89 dismissed the application under Section 23-A on the ground that applicant since has purchased the suit house after his retirement and there is another house of his father at Burhanpur, he can not be said to be in bona fide need of the suit house for residence for himself or any member of his family.

(3.) IT is an admitted fact that applicant Naveen Chandra has purchased the suit house from Natwarlal s/o Chhaganlal Mehta vide registered sale-deed dated 18-2-87. A retired Government servant acquiring accommodation after retirement, may file eviction application under Section 23-A. While dealing with the aspect aforesaid, the Division Bench of this Court in Jenendra Kumar v. Roshanlal, 1994 JLJ 19 has held :-