R.K. SHRIVASTAVA Vs. ANJUMAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) BEING aggrieved by the judgment and decree dated 9.9.2004 passed by II ADJ, Indore in Regular Civil Appeal No. 26/2004, whereby the judgment and decree dated 5.3.2004 for eviction of appellant was passed by 11th Civil Judge Class-I, Indore in Civil Suit No. 52-A/03 was confirmed, present appeal has been filed.

(2.) SHORT admitted facts of the case are that appellant is tenant in the suit accommodation @ Rs. 150/- per month of respondent No. 1. Suit was filed for eviction by the respondent No. 1 on the ground that tenancy of the appellant has been terminated under section 106 of Transfer of Property Act. Hence, appellant is entitled for vacation of the suit premises. Learned counsel for the appellant submits that ownership of the respondent No. 1 is in dispute as the respondent No. 1 has already filed the suit for declaration to the effect that it be declared that suit property is Wakf Property. It is submitted that said suit was filed in the year 1969 and it is yet to be decided. Learned counsel further submits that in view of this when the rights of respondent No. 1 is subjudiced decree of eviction cannot be passed against the appellant. It is further submitted that so far as contention of the appellant that the suit ought to have been filed under section 12 of M.P. Accommodation Control Act is concerned, since the suit property is managed by the trustees of the Wakf and the said property is Wakf property, therefore, provisions of M.P. Accommodation Control Act are not attracted. Reliance has been placed on a decision reported in 1999 (2) JLJ 380, Betibai and others v. Nathoorani and others, wherein Hon'ble apex Court held that,