GANGADHAR NARLA Vs. NALIN GALA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This first appeal has been preferred by the appellants/plaintiffs challenging the judgment and decree dtd. 4/9/2015 passed by 5th Additional District Judge, Jabalpur in Civil Suit No.10-A/2015 whereby learned trial Court has dismissed the plaintiffs' suit filed for eviction on the ground under Sec. 12(1)(m) of the M.P Accommodation Control Act, 1961 (in short 'the Act').

(2.) In short the facts are that the plaintiffs instituted a suit for eviction with the allegations that they are owners of the suit property bearing plot No.10, 11 and 12 having Municipal House No.1374, total area 45000 sq.ft over which a house is constructed over an area 2360 sq.ft which came in ownership of the plaintiffs on the basis of registered gift deed dtd. 17/5/1976 executed by their father late Shri Tatarao Narla. It is alleged that on 1/11/2007 an agreement of tenancy was executed for a period 60 months in between the appellant/plaintiff 1 and defendant whereby the suit property was let out for residential purpose on monthly rent of Rs.5,000.00, with the stipulation that the lessee shall not change nature of property without previous consent of the lessor, but contrary to the terms of the lease, the defendant sent a letter to the plaintiffs informing that necessary maintenance of the house in question has been done in which an amount of Rs.1,50,000.00 was spent and the house still requires a lot of maintenance work, thereupon the plaintiff visited the suit property and found that the defendant has constructed a godown, servant quarter and garage in the open area of the suit property without consent of the plaintiffs. As a result thereof the plaintiffs sent a legal notice dtd. 20/4/2009 to the defendant terminating the lease with the further instructions to him to vacate the premises within a period of 15 days, but by sending false reply he denied the averments of notice and contended that he has raised construction of servant quarter, garage and store room with prior permission of the plaintiffs and it is of temporary nature. With these allegations the suit was filed.

(3.) The defendant appeared and filed written statement denying the allegations made in the plaint, however agreement of tenancy and construction raised by the defendant was admitted with the contentions that the temporary construction made by him has not materially altered the rented accommodation to the detriment of the landlord's interest and has not diminished its value. On inter alia contentions the suit was prayed to be dismissed.