BHAVARILAL TILOKCHAND Vs. BANNATWALA JAIN & CO

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This appeal has been filed challenging the judgment and decree dated 15.07.2014, passed by the Addl. District Judge, Burhanpur, in Civil Appeal No.3-A/2002, thereby affirming the judgment and decree dated 23.07.2002, passed by I Civil Judge, Class-II, Burhanpur, in Civil Suit No.52-A/1995.

(2.) The respondent/plaintiff is the owner of the suit accommodation, having an area of 4430 sq.ft. The appellant/ defendant was tenant in the said premises. Before it was sold by two sale deeds dated 17.8.1976 from successor-in-interest of Mathuradas and Goverdhandas, the agreed rent payable was Rs. 196.75 paise. The suit accommodation was let out to the appellant/defendant by Dwarkadas for commercial purpose. In the said two sale deeds, the purchaser of the above mentioned accommodation was shown as "Ambika Dying and Sizing Mills, Ke Sanchalak Bannatwala Jain & Company Ke Taraf Se Bhagidar Shri Krishanadas Vald Gopaldas Bannatwala Niwasi Tappura, Burhanpur." After completion of the said transaction, the notices were served on the appellant/defendant communicating to it the factum of purchase of the suit premises as also containing demand for payment of rent to the purchaser. In spite of such notice, the appellant/defendant did not attorn in favour of respondent/plaintiff. The demand and claim in that notice was denied by the original owner again through the Advocate. Thereafter, on 25.1.2017, a suit was filed against the appellant/defendant for its eviction from the suit accommodation, on the ground under Section 12(i)(a), (b), (c), (m) & (k) of the M.P. Accommodation Control Act (hereinafter referred to as the 'Act' for brevity). However, extensive amendment was made in the plaint after one year of the expiry of the purchase by the respondent/plaintiff, claiming eviction also under Section 12(1)(f) of the Act, on the ground that the accommodation in the suit is required by bonafide need for shiftingthe plaintiff's Mill to the suit accommodation.

(3.) The trial Court after framing issues and recording the evidence of both the parties decreed the said suit vide judgment and decree dated 20.2002. Against the said judgment and decree, the appellant/defendant has preferred an appeal before the Addl. District Judge, Burhanpur. The first Appellate Court vide impugned judgment and decree dated 15.7.2004, has affirmed the judgment and decree passed by the trial Court. Being aggrieved by that judgment and decree, the appellant/ defendant has preferred this Second Appeal before this Court, which was admitted for hearing on 27.04.2005, on following substantial questions of law :-