RAVI PRAKASH Vs. HUSSAIN ALI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This appeal by plaintiff under section 100 CPC is directed against the reversing judgment and decree dated 08/05/2003 passed in civil appeal No.90A/2002 dismissing the suit seeking eviction on the grounds of "arrears of rent" under section 12(1)(a) since August, 1994 at the rate of Rs.140/- per month till April, 1995 and "bona fide need" under section 12(1)(f) of the Madhya Pradesh Accommodation Control Act, 1961 (For short 'the 1961 Act"). Th trial Court vide judgment dated 18/09/2002 passed in civil suit No.91A/1995 has decreed the suit under section 12(1)(f) of the 1961 Act and also awarded damages at the rate of Rs.140/- per month till eviction.

(2.) This Court while admitting the appeal on 28/04/2004 has framed the following substantial questions of law:

(3.) Facts relevant and necessary for disposal of this appeal are that the plaintiff-appellant has filed a suit against defendant/respondent/tenant for eviction on the grounds of "arrears of rent" 12(1)(a) and "bona fide need" under section 12(1)(f) of the 1961 Act inter alia contending that the shop situated at Loha Bazar, Ward No.13, Vidisha (For short, 'the suit shop') is of his ownership, having purchased the same by a registered sale deed dated 29/06/199 By a notice dated 15/07/1993 (exhibit P/1), served upon the defendant, the plaintiff made known the defendant that suit shop has been purchased by him and now the defendant has become his tenant in the suit shop and, therefore, called upon defendant to pay arrears of rent from December,1992 to June, 1993 at the rate of Rs.140/- per month, total Rs.980/-. Thereafter, the defendant paid rent to the plaintiff and obtained receipts vide exhibits D/2 and D/ The plaintiff intended to run a hardware business in the suit shop and he did not have any suitable accommodation for the said purpose. Since August, 1994, the defendant had not paid rent. The plaintiff by registered notice dated 26/12/1994 (exhibit P/5) terminated the tenancy from the midnight of 28/02/1995 calling upon the defendant to vacate the suit shop and also pay the arrears of rent . Neither defendant paid the arrears of rent nor vacated the suit shop.