HIRALAL Vs. SANWALDAS JAIN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS is tenants' second appeal. The suit filed by the landlord was dismissed by the trial court but the first appellate court reversed the finding recorded by the trial court.

(2.) THE present suit was filed on the grounds stipulated in Section 12(1)(a), (c) and (o) of the M.P. Accommodation Control Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as the 'Act'). The landlord pleaded that the tenant was in arrears of rent w.e.f. 1st July, 1979. It was pleaded that these arrears were payable upto the date of notice which was dated 18th March, 1980. This notice was said to have been duly served on the appellant-tenants. The rent was claimed at the rate of Rs. 40/-. The landlord also sought eviction on the ground that the tenant had created nuisance by encroaching upon a portion of the open courtyard. It was pleaded that he has put a shaded Chappar over the land so encroached upon by him. It was further pleaded that not only the land was encroached upon but nuisance was also created by the defendant by tethering a cow on the encroached land under the shed. The further case was that whenever the landlord would ask the tenant to discontinue with the aforementioned acts the tenant could pick quarrel with the landlord and use abusive language and this according to landlord constituted nuisance. The third and the last ground for seeking eviction was that the house meant for residential purposes was being used for non-residential purpose as a loom had been installed for the purpose of manufacturing carpets. It was pleaded that third person, an outsider was associated in this venture.

(3.) THE trial court fixed the provisional rent at Rs. 15 per month. This provisional rent was later on held to be the contractual rent. It was held that the tenant was not in arrears of rent. The ground of encroachment and creating of nuisance was held to be not proved. Similarly the change of user was held to be not established. On this conclusion having been arrived at the suit was dismissed.