RISHABH KUMAR JAIN Vs. RAMKRIPAL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The appellant has filed the present appeal challenging the judgment and decree dated 20/12/1999 passed in Civil Appeal No.29-A/1998 by 2nd Additional District Judge, Balaghat thereby reversing the judgment and decree dated 18/10/1994 passed by 4th Civil judge Class-II, Balaghat in Civil Suit No.230-A/1994.

(2.) The case of the plaintiff before the trial Court is that the plaintiff is owner of the shop No.2 situated at Subhash Chowk, Balaghat and the respondent is the tenant in the said house and is running medical shop. The plaintiff is the doctor by profession and is carrying on his profession in two room in the said house belonging to the joint family property. The plaintiff has installed an x-ray and ECG machine in the suit accommodation and the suit accommodation is not the suitable accommodation for the said purpose, therefore, the plaintiff requires the suit accommodation for the purpose of constructing a hospital on the said premises and for the said purpose, he prepared map also and having sufficient fund. He further pleaded that the plaintiff is not having an alternative suitable accommodation in the city of Balaghat, therefore, he had given a notice dated 3/1/1989 to the defendant for termination of tenancy. However, after receiving the notice, the defendant failed to vacate the premises, the plaintiff has, therefore, filed the present civil suit for eviction on the ground of bona fide requirement.

(3.) The defendant has filed his written statement and denied that the defendant is the tenant of the plaintiff. He submits that the property in question is the joint family property of one Motilal Jain and his sons and the plaintiff is having an alternate accommodation in the city of Balaghat where he can run his profession and the partition deed executed between the family members is a sham and bogus document and the present suit is filed only for the purpose of eviction of the defendant.