PRAGATI MITRA MANDAL Vs. MANOHARLAL KHANDELWAL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) SHRI S. R. Saraf, counsel for appellant. Shri Sudhansu Vyas, counsel for respondent. This is defendant's appeal assailing the judgment and decree of ejectment passed by the Courts below, on the ground of section 12 (1) (f) of M. P. Accommodation Control Act.

(2.) IT was the case of the plaintiff that by virtue of Will executed by his father Ex. P/4 dated 5-4-1998, he has become owner of the property wherein the shop admeasuring 10 x 12 square feet is situated, wherein the defendant is the tenant. The said shop is required bona fide to his daughter namely Kavita to start jewellery shop. It is also pleaded that he is not having no other alternative accommodation of his ownership suitable for her business, therefore, decree of eviction was sought for against the defendants appellants. The defendants by filing their written statement stated that on the basis of alleged Will ownership has not been proved by the plaintiff, therefore, he is not entitled to get the decree of eviction. It is further said that the plaintiff-respondent is having an alternative accommodation, which is suitable to him, therefore, the need of the plaintiff is not bona fide. In view of the said submissions prayer was made to dismiss the suit.

(3.) LEARNED trial Court has framed various issues along with the issue of bona fide requirement of the plaintiff's daughter. After appreciation of the evidence, the finding is recorded that the suit property is of ownership of the plaintiff as per Will and required bona fide for starting the business of his daughter to which he is not having any other suitable alternative accommodation available. Accordingly, decree of eviction under section 12 (1) (f) of M. P. Accommodation Control Act was passed.