HARBANS SINGH Vs. MARGRAT G BHINGARDIVE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This case, on a reference by a learned single Judge of this Court, was placed before this Full Bench, for consideration and opinion of a question of law as to the ambit and scope of S.23-J read with S.23-A of the Madhva Pradesh Accommodation Control Act, 1961 (Act No. 41 of 1961).

(2.) The necessary facts giving rise to the legal question are not in serious dispute and lie in a narrow compass. The non-applicant is a co-sharer-owner of the suit premises along with her two major sons, she being the widow of her late husband G.D. Bhingardive who had purchased the same. The non-applicant being a widow initiated proceedings before the Rent Controlling Authority, Jabalpur, by filing an application under S.23-A(a) of the M.P. Accommodation Control Act, 1961 (for brevity referred to as 'the Act') for eviction of tenant, the applicant herein, from the premises in his occupation originally on the plea that the said premises were required bona fide by her for occupation as residence for her two married sons and their children. The landlady/non-applicant being a widow claimed that she belongs to the special category of landlord defined in S.23-J(iii) of the Act and, therefore, she was entitled to pursue her remedy in summary proceedings as provided in Chapter III-A of the Act, before the Dent Controlling Authority on whom jurisdiction is conferred by virtue of the provisions contained in S.23-A of the Act.

(3.) The tenant applicant entered appearance and besides denying the bona fide requirement as alleged by the landlady also took objection that the alleged ground of bona fide requirement of accommodation for residence of married sons of the landlady/non-applicant was not covered by S.23-A(a) and the Rent Controlling Authority having no jurisdiction, the landlady could not be permitted to take recourse to the special summary procedure provided in Chapter IIIA of the Act. Thereupon the landlady/non-applicant moved an application for amendment of her original eviction application proposing an amendment to the effect that the premises in question were not only required bona fide by her for occupation as residence for her married sons and their families but also for her own residence. The Rent Controlling Authority allowed the said amendment by his order dated 28-12-1987, overruled the objection and continued the eviction proceedings.