R. C. SHRIVASTAVA, J.

( 1 ) A Single Bench of this Court, while dealing with Second Appeal No. 35/86, feet difficulty, in view of some conflicting decisions of this Court, in deciding the question as to whether mere disclaimer of the landlord's title by the tenant entitles the landlord to a decree for his eviction in terms of S. 12 (1) (c) of the M. P. Accommodation Control Act, 1961, without proving further that such disclaimer affects the plaintiff's interest adversely and substantially. Therefore, he moved the Hon'ble the Chief Justice for constituting a larger Bench for deciding the question. Thus, the said question came to be referred to this Division Bench.

( 2 ) THE question, as framed, is purely that of law. It presupposes that estoppel under S. 116 and there is also 'disclaimer' by him prior to the date of institution of the suit. We say so because there may be a case where, in certain set of circumstances, the estoppel under S. 116 of the Evidence Act may not be operative, entitling the tenant to challenge the plaintiff's title and his averments may not amount to 'disclaimer'. The terms 'disclaimer' has not been defined either in the M. P. Accommodation Control Act, 1961,

Click Here to Read the rest of this document