SUSHILA DEVI Vs. KEDARNATH GUPTA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This judgement shall also dispose of Civil Revision No. 202/1985 (Kedarnath Gupta v. Smt. Sushila Devi Somani). In both the Civil Revisions, filed under S.23-E of the M.P. Accommodation Control Act, 1961 (as amended by Act No. 27 of 1983) (hereinafter called 'the Act'), both the applicants have challenged the legality of the impugned order passed by the Rent Controlling Authority, Gwalior, on 3-6-1985 in Case No. 336/83-84 (90)(7).

(2.) This is a battle between the landlord and tenant. One Gopal Somani was the landlord of the non-residential suit accommodation, situate in the area of Deedwana Oli, Lashkar, Gwalior. He inducted one Kedarnath (hereinafter addressed as 'tenant') in the suit premises as his tenant, on 22-6-1979, for a period of 5 years, by a registered lease deed, on a monthly rent of Rs. 750.00 p.m. Landlord, Gopal Somani, died on 19-5-1981 leaving behind him, his widow, Smt. Sushila Devi, and two major sons, Krishna Kumar Somani and Shiv Kumar Somani. The period of 5 years as mentioned in the lease deed expired on 21-6-1984. The widow of the deceased landlord filed an application under S.23-A(b) of the Act before the Rent Controlling Authority, Gwalior, on 13-7-1984 praying for the eviction of the tenant from the suit premises on the ground of bona fide requirement of the premises for starting cloth business for her major sons. The tenant within time filed an application before the Rent Controlling Authority for permission to defend and therein he raised several grounds. One of them was that the applicant-widow has no right to file the present proceeding because after the death of the landlord, his both major sons along with the widow have inherited the suit property and all the three are the landlords. Inter alia, the tenant also raised a plea that the applicant has no right under law to present the present application, as the premises are not required by her but the requirement is of her sons. The tenant also filed an application under S.34 of the Arbitration Act and therein raised an objection that the registered lease deed contains an arbitration clause; hence the ejectment proceedings be stayed.

(3.) The Rent Controlling Authority (hereafter referred to as 'the Authority') in the impugned order held :-