RAMESH CHAND AGRAWAL Vs. GOPALKRISHNA UPADHYAY

JUDGEMENT

(1.) A decree for eviction has been passed against the present appellant, under section 12 (1) (c) of the Madhya Pradesh Accommodation Control Act, 1961. The finding recorded by the first appellate Court is that the appellant had set up a title in himself and therefore, he has committed a disqualification and has lost his right to remain in possession. As to in what manner this finding as to disclaimer has been recorded be noticed :

(2.) IT is an admitted case that the appellant was given on rent an open piece of land. On this piece of land a small Patore/hut was constructed by the present appellant. He applied for electric connection. In the application it has been submitted by him that he is owner of the house. Some application was also moved before the Municipal Council in which he claimed ownership of the building in question. As these above factors were taken note of while coming to the conclusion that the appellant has disclaimed the title of the landlord. It is this finding which is being challenged in this Court in this second appeal.

(3.) THE law is well settled. The law has recognised due ownership. The ownership of land may vest in other person. Some of the judicial pronouncement in this regard be noticed as under :