MAHAVEER KUMAR Vs. SANIBAI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS second appeal is preferred against the judgment and decree passed by the Second Additional Judge to the Court of District Judge, Ratlam in C.P.A. No. 3 -A of 93 arising out of the judgment and decree dated 1.3.94 passed by the learned First Civil Judge Class II, Ratlam, in COS No. 15 -A of 1993.

(2.) THE facts giving rise to this appeal, in short, are that the respondent Nos. 1 and 2 had filed an application under S. 23 -A of the M.P. Accommodation Control Act, 1961 (hereinafter called 'the Act') in the Court of the Rent Controlling Authority, Ratlam for eviction of the appellant from the suit premises on the ground that they were the landlords of the house in question. The R.C.A. after recording the evidence passed an order for eviction in favour of respondents Nos. 1 and 2. Aggrieved by the order of eviction passed by the R.C.A. the present appellant filed a revision petition before this Court under S. 23 -E of the Act. This Court, however, did not interfere in the order of the R.C.A. and confirmed the same. Consequently the revision was rejected.

(3.) THE learned counsel for the appellant Shri Maheshwari strenuously argues that the order of eviction has been obtained by fraud because of respondent Nos. 1 and 2 could not prove their title to the suit accommodation. Actually the order was passed without disclosing the full facts before the Court and as such the order being based on fraud and suppression of material facts, the civil Court has the jurisdiction to declare the eviction order as a nullity.