PUSHPA SAMAIYA Vs. HARISH MAKHIJA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard on the question of admission.

(2.) The appellant/defendants have filed this appeal being aggrieved by the judgment and decree dated 16 -02 -2016, passed by the VIII Additional District Judge, Jabalpur, in C.A.No. 65 - A/2015 affirming and confirming the judgment and decree dated 17 -03 -2015, passed by IV Civil Judge Class -II, Jabalpur, in C.S.No. 106 -A/2012 whereby the suit filed by the respondent/plaintiff for eviction of the appellant/defendants has been decreed on the grounds mentioned in Section 12(1)(a) and 12(1)(f) of the M.P. Accommodation Control Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as the "Act").

(3.) The learned counsel appearing for the appellants submits that the finding recorded by the courts below is perverse inasmuch as the courts below have not taken into consideration the fact that the appellants had deposited the arrears of rent continuously and regularly and, therefore, no order or decree of eviction against them could have been passed under Section 12(1)(a) of the Act.