MADAK CHAND JAIN Vs. FATMA BAI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This is a reference made by the learned single Judge on account of two conflicting decisions of the single Bench - one given by Justice Shiv Dayal (as he then was) in Kishanlal v. Rambharose 1976 Jab LJ (SN) 63 and another given by Justice Bachawat (as he then was) in Kevalchand Puranchand v. Suganchand, 1983 MPLJ 381, on the following question of law, which reads as under :

(2.) The present revision has been preferred under Section 115 of the Code of Civil Procedure against the order dated 24-7-1998 passed by the 1st Civil Judge, Class II, Khandwa, in Civil Suit No. 45-A/98 rejecting the objection raised by the applicant/defendant regarding the Court-fees and jurisdiction of the Court for entertaining the suit without payment of Court-fees for eviction from the additional accommodation.

(3.) The brief facts which are necessary for disposal of this reference are that the respondent/plaintiff instituted the instant civil suit against the applicant/defendant for his eviction from the suit accommodation as also for injunction. The eviction of the applicant was sought on the ground, inter alia that the applicant has taken possession of two rooms which were not included in the premises let out to him. The applicant controverted the plaint allegation and pleaded inter alia that the valuation of the suit for the purpose of Court-fees and jurisdiction was not proper. The respondent/plaintiff was required to give a separate valuation regarding the ejectment from the encroached accommodation and also to pay the Court-fees thereon. The instant suit was filed by the plaintiff under Section 12(1)(o) of the M.P. Accommodation Control Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as the 'ACT' for short). Section 12(1)(o), which is relevant for our purposes, reads as under :-