RIDH KARAN PATNI Vs. JAGDISH PRASAD AGARWAL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Sensing a conflict between Jagdish Chandra v. Sara Bai, 1984 MPRCJ (Note) 105, dated 13-3-1984 of Muley, J. and 'Phool Chandra Garg v. Ram Narain' in C. M. A. No.85 of 1974, (G) decided by. Rampal Singh, J., on 28-6-1985, on the interpretation of sub-s. (6) of S.12 of the M.P. Accommodation Control Act, 1961 (Act 41 of 1961) - hereinafter 'the Act'-, the learned single Judge, Dr. T.N.Singh, J., stated the following question for decision by a larger Bench.

(2.) For a focal adjustment and then to find the focal point of the reference and the required answer-thereto, we have to bear in mind that the order of reference contains no admitted/proved facts and circumstances of the case. The order which refers to a conflict between Jagdish Chandra's case, 1984 MPRCJ (Note) 105 and Phool Chandra's case (C.M.A. No.85 of 1974, decided on 28-6-85), does not mention the ratio decidendi of those judgments. Hence the order of reference and the question stated therein call for an answer not merely to the stated question, but to the stated question seen in the context of any discoverable conflict between the two rulings on the interpretation of the provisions of sub-s.(6) of S.12 of the Act, and expect us to resolve the predicated conflict in the rulings.

(3.) We shall be construing the provisions of sub-s. (6) of S.12 in the context of other parts of the Act; for this, we have the following authority of Reserve Bank of India v. Peerless General Finance and Investment Co. (1987)1 SCC 424 at p. 450, Chinnappa Reddy, J. said :