SHREE SINGH Vs. VIVEK SINGH AND OTHERS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This civil revision has been filed under Section 23 (E) of the MP Accommodation Control Act by the respondent/tenant, being aggrieved by order dated 19.02.2016, passed by the Rent Controlling Authority, Satna, in Case No. 22A-90/2012-13, whereby the respondent's application for eviction of non-applicant/petitioner from suit premises has been allowed, under Section 23(A) of the MP Accommodation Control Act.

(2.) Petitioner submits that the Rent Controlling Authority has no jurisdiction to entertain the application for eviction of premises, except the categories of persons specified in the provisions of Section 23 (J) of the Act. The respondents do not fall under the same. The petitioner further contended that the Rent Controlling Authority completely overlooked the material placed before him by the parties and drew wrong findings on the fact and law. Therefore, the petitioner prayed to set aside the impugned order dated 19.02.2016 passed by the Rent Controlling Authority.

(3.) On the other hand, respondents claimed that respondent No. 2 is retired employee of the Airforce. He is an aged person. Both the respondents are co-owners. The disputed house is required for residence of respondent No. 2 for his treatment at Satna. The suit premises is suitable for him. He has no other alternative accommodation at Satna. Further, it is submitted that, according to the rent agreement, the disputed house was rented only for one year. After completion of one year the petitioner has not vacated the same, therefore, application under Section 23 (A) of the M.P. Accommodation Control Act has been filed for eviction.