ASGARALI SADIQUALI Vs. MOHANDAS GOVERDHANDAS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS is landlord's second appeal against the reversing judgment passed by the Additional District Judge, Biora, District Rajgarh in regular Civil Appeal No. 42-A/03.

(2.) APPEAL was admitted for final hearing on 16-8-2004 on the following substantial question of law : "has the first Appellate Court erred in disregarding the ground of bona fide requirement on irrelevant consideration?"

(3.) FETCTS which are necessary for the disposal of this appeal in brief are as under. Appellants filed an eviction suit on the allegation that they are the owner of building situated on Mukherjee Road in the main market of Biora. On the ground floor of the suit building, the respondent is running a shop on payment of monthly rent of Rs. 325/ -. Appellants set up the bona fide need of Daud Ahmed, major son of appellant No. 1 for starting grocery business from the suit shop. It was alleged that the appellants had no other reasonable suitable non-residential accommodation of their own except the suit shop to satisfy the need of Daud ahmed. The respondent contested the suit and in the written statement denied all material allegations including the bona fide need of Daud Ahmed for starting grocery business in the suit shop. On the basis of pleadings and issues stuck by the trial Court, parties adduced evidence. Learned trial Judge after appreciating the evidence came to the conclusion that the appellants were able to establish their case of the bona fide need of Daud Ahmed and accordingly passed a decree for eviction under section 12 (1) (f) of the M. P. Accommodation Control Act 1961 (for short the Act ). The judgment and decree was challenged by the respondent herein in First Appeal. By the impugned judgment and decree, the appeal was allowed and the suit was dismissed. Hence this Second Appeal on the above mentioned substantial question of law.