BHANWARIBAI Vs. SAU KESHARBAI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) HEARD Shri M.K. Jain, learned counsel for appellant and Shri Manish Manana, learned counsel for respondents. With the consent of parties and looking to the issue involved in the appeal, the appeal is heard finally today itself in motion. The plaintiff obtained a decree u/s 12 (1) (a) and (m) of the M.P. Accommodation Control Act from the trial Court.

(2.) HOWEVER , the first appellate Court confirmed the decree, u/s 12(1)(m) and set aside in so far as it relates to ground u/s12 (1) (a) ibid at the instance of defendant in his appeal. In other words the decree in so far as it relates to ground u/s 12(1) (m) was concerned, the same was upheld, whereas the decree u/s 12 (1) (a) was concerned, it was set aside. So the only decree for eviction that was passed in favour of the plaintiff was on the ground covered u/s 12 (1) (m) ibid. It is this decree which is assailed by the defendant in this second appeal.

(3.) THE only mistake that both the Courts below have committed is that while passing decree u/s 12 (1) (m) ibid they did not take note of S. 12 (10) of the Act. Section 12 (10) of the reads as under : -