S.K. Jha, C.J.--1. The only substantial question which has been framed in this suit at the time of admission of its appeal is "whether the amount deposited by the tenant in compliance to the provisions of section 13 (1) of the M.P. Accommodation Control Act, 1961, can be allowed to be refunded to the tenant even though the tenant was in arrears of rent and had deposited the same to seek protection against eviction."

2. The only relevant facts for the disposal of this appeal are these:

There is a small shop which was let out by the appellant/landlord to the respondents/tenants/defendants round about the year 1972 or 1973. The respondents/tenants defaulted in payment of rent. Hence, the present suit was filed by the appellant/landlord for eviction of the respondents/tenants from the suit premises. The issues framed in the suit were:

(i) Whether the defendants could be evicted from the disputed premises or not?

(ii) Whether the defendants had defaulted in the payment of rent on account of which they could be evicted?

(iii) Whether the plaintiff/landlord was entitled to a sum of Rs. 150/- per month as rent or as compensation for occupation by the tenants?

The answer with regard to a