(1.) When this matter came before the learned Single Judge, he felt that the correctness of the two single Bench decisions of this Court in Nanuram v. Pundlik, 1984 M.P.R.C.J. Note 77 and Bankimchandra Manilaji Sanghvi v. Radhakishan Nandraj Sharma 1984 M.P.L.J. 480 required consideration by a larger Bench. Accordingly honourable the Chief Justice constituted a Division Bench. The Division Bench also seems to have taken note of some more single Bench decisions of this Court on the point in question. A Division Bench decision of this Court in B. Johnson v. C.S. Naidu, 1985 Jab LJ 793 had also been referred to, and it felt that the question, which had been referred to the Bench was not directly in issue in Johnson's case (supra). All the same, in view of the observations made therein, the Division Bench felt that to set at rest the controversy, the matter required further consideration by a still larger Bench. Accordingly this Full Bench came to be constituted.
(2.) Before dealing with the question in controversy, it would be appropriate to refer to some relevant facts. Respondent Hemant Kumar has filed a suit sometime in the year 1976 against the present petitioner for eviction and arrears of rent, etc. The eviction of the petitioner-tenant was sought on different grounds contained in Section 12(1) of the M.P. Accommodation Control Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as "the Act"). On an application being filed by the plaintiff, the trial Court allowed the plaintiff to withdraw his claim of eviction on the ground of bona fide requirement only, with permission to proceed against the tenant in accordance with Section 23-A of the Act. It is the correctness of this order, which has been challenged by the petitioner-tenant.
(3.) Here we may refer to the relevant amendments made in the Act. The one, with which we are directly concerned is the M.P. Accommodation Control (Amendment) Act, 1983 (No. 27 of 1983), which admittedly had come into force. By Section 2 of this Amending Act, the title 'M.P. Accommodation Control Act, 1961 (No. 41 of 1961)' was substituted as under :