BANSHILAL Vs. SMT. MANAKBAI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This is defendant's appeal against the judgement and decree passed by learned Additional District Judge, Khandwa, reversing the judgment and degree of the trial Court and directing eviction of the appellant from the suit accommodation on grounds under Sec. 12 (1) (a) and (g) of the M.P. Accommodation Control Act.

(2.) The house in question belonged originally to one Harakchand . Plaintiff purchased it on 3.11.1972. Defendant-appellant was already occupying a portion of the house as the tenant of the erstwhile owner. He did not pay any rent to the plaintiff-respondent. Plaintiff-respondent served a notice of demand and also for terminating the tenancy and filed a suit claiming eviction. She alleged that defendant had not paid arrears of rent even after notice of demand. She claimed she needed the suit accommodation for her bona fide residential requirement as she had no other equally suitable accommodation for the purpose. According to her the defendant, who was a teacher, had been transferred from Khandwa to some other town and had shifted his family as well but had wrongfully locked the premises. The defendant had carried out unauthorized construction which was detrimental to her interest. Lastly, it was pleaded that the house was in a dilapidated condition and it needed repairs which could not be carried out without the accommodation being vacated.

(3.) Defendant-appellant denied all the allegations made above. He pleaded that the rent of the accommodation was Rs. 3.00 per month which he was willing to pay, but the plaintiff refused to accept it. All other grounds for eviction were denied. It was pleaded lastly that the notice determining the lease was invalid because he was a tenant of a larger accommodation, but notice determining the tenancy was in respect of a portion only.