HARIKISHAN Vs. KAMLABAI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS defendant's revision petition is directed against the eviction order dated 29.5.1987, passed by the rent controlling Authority, Indore, in Eviction Case No. 226 of 1983.

(2.) THE short question involved in this petition is, whether the bonafide requirement of the plaintiff-respondent No. 2 Sampatbai, of the suit accommodation is proved ?

(3.) THE tenant-petitioner was granted leave to defend the suit. It was contended by him that Sampatbai, whose need was pleaded, is a resident of Dhulia and her so-called bonafide need as well as the ground on which it was based, were denied. A specific reference was made to the notice dated 3.7.198(sic), given by the plaintiff-respondent, calling upon the petitioner to vacate the premises on the ground that the suit accommodation was bonafide required by Kamlabai and her two sons, Dinesh Kumar and Laxmi Kumar; whereas in the present application, the bonafide requirement as pleaded was that of Sampatbai.