Back
1994 JLJ 408
R.D. Shukla, J.
Gangadhar v. Shantaram Lokre
Civil Revn. No. 394 of 1992; against the order of Rent Controlling Authority,
Indore, passed in Ejectment Case No. 440 of 1983; Decided on 7.4.1993.
The power of revision conferred on the High Court is wider than section 115 C.P.C. The High Court, while exercising its revisional jurisdiction, has the power to look into the correctness of the finding regarding bona fide need -of the landlord. But while examining the correctness of the finding, the High Court could not act as a Court of appeal and re-appreciate evidence to come to its own conclusion. 1986 JLJ 145 relied on. [Para 10
(2) Accommodation Control Act, 1961 (M.P.) -- S. 23-A (a) -- eviction sought for personal requirement -- requirement must subsist till final decree is passed -- if in the meantime it is satisfied the suit must fail. 1981 JLJ 716 (SC) followed. [Para 13
(3) Accommodation Control Act, 1961 (M.P.) -- S. 23-A (a) -- legal representative of landlord brought on record -- his requirement along with the requirement of his family may be looked into -- subsequent event of satisfaction or increase ill requirement may also be considered.
Where the legal representatives of the original landlord, who has filed the suit has been brought on record, they are entitled to show their need because of subsequent events. It may not be out of place to mention it here that because of the subsequent events, if their need is wholly satisfied, they will definitely be non-suited. In this case, therefore, if the personal requirement or the substituted landlord has increased because of the subsequent event, he is entitled to demonstrate and prove it and it has rightly been accepted by the Rent Controlling Authority. [Para 15
(4) Accommodation Control Act, 1961 (M.P.) -- S. 23-A (a) -- major married sons residing with landlord -- their requirement would be considered. 1986 JLJ 713 distinguished. [Para 16
(5) Accommodation Control Act, 1961 (M.P.) -- S. 23-A (a) -- requirement of guestd`room in family -- is not tile requirement of guest but is a requirement of landlord himself. [Paras 18 & 19
¼1½ LFkku fu;a=.k vf/kfu;e] 1961 ¼e-ç-½ & /kkjk 12&³ & ds v/khu mPp U;k;ky; dh iqujh{k.k dh ‘kfDr & fl-ç-la- dh /kkjk 115 ds v/khu çnÙk ‘kfDr ls vf/kd foLr`r gS & rFkkfi] ;g vihy U;k;ky; dh Hkk¡fr dk;Z ugha dj ldrkA
mPp U;k;ky; dks çnÙk iqujh{k.k dh ‘kfDr fl-ç-la dh /kkjk 115 ls vf/kd foLr`r gSA mPp U;k;ky; dks viuh vf/kdkfjrk ç;qDr djrs le; Hkw&Lokeh dh okLrfod vko‘;drk ds fo"k; esa fu"d"kZ dh ‘kq)rk dk fujh{k.k djus dh ‘kfDr gSaA fdarq fu"d"kZ dh ‘kq)rk dh ijh{kk djus esa mPp U;k;ky; vihy U;k;ky; dh Hkk¡fr dk;Z ugha dj ldrk] viuk Lo;a dk fu"d"kZ fudkyus ds fy, lk{; dk iquewZY;kadu ugha dj ldrkA 1986 ts ,y ts 145 voyafcrA ¿iSjk 10
¼2½ LFkku fu;a=.k vf/kfu;e] 1961 ¼e-ç-½ & /kkjk 23&d ¼d½ & oS;fDrd vko‘;drk ds fy, csn[kyh dh bZILkk & vko‘;drk vafre fMØh ikfjr gksus rd cuh jguk pkfg, & ;fn bl chp mldk lek/kku gks tkrk gS] okn vo‘; gh vlQy gksxkA 1981 ts ,y ts 716 ¼mPpre U;k-½ vuqlfjrA ¿iSjk 13
¼3½ LFkku fu;a=.k vf/kfu;e] 1961 ¼e-ç-½ & /kkjk 23&d ¼d½ & Hkw&Lokeh dk fof/kd çfrfuf/k vfHkys[k ij yk;k x;k & mldh vko‘;drk mlds dqVqac dh vko‘;drk ds lkFk ns[kh tk ldrh gS & Ik‘pkrorhZ lek/kku dh ?kVuk vFkok vko‘;drk esa o`f) ij Hkh fopkj fd;k tk ldrk gSA
tc ewy Hkw&Lokeh ds] ftlus okn Qkby fd;k gS] fof/kd çfrfuf/k vfHkys[k ij yk, tk pqds gksa] os Ik‘pkrorhZ ?kVukvksa ds dkj.k mudh vko‘;drk crkus ds gdnkj gSaA ;gk¡ ij mYys[k djuk vuko‘;d ugha gksxk fd Ik‘pkrorhZ ?kVukvksa ds dkj.k ;fn vko‘;drk dk iw.kZ lek/kku gks tkrk gS] mudk okn fuf‘pr :Ik ls lekIr gks tk,xkA bl ekeys esa] blfy,] ;fn çfrLFkkfir Hkw&Lokeh dh oS;fDrd vko‘;drk Ik‘pkrorhZ ?kVuk ds dkj.k c<+ xbZ gS] og mls crkus vkSj lkfcr djus dk gdnkj gS vkSj HkkM+k fu;a=d çkf/kdkjh }kjk ;g Bhd gh Lohdkj dh xbZ gSA ¿iSjk 15
¼4½ LFkku fu;a=.k vf/kfu;e] ¼e-ç-½ & /kkjk 23&d ¼d½ & o;Ld fookfgr iq=ksa dk fuokl Hkw&Lokeh ds lkFk & mudh vko‘;drk ij fopkj djuk gksxkA 1986 ts ,y ts 713 çHksfnrA ¿iSjk 16
¼5½ LFkku fu;a=.k vf/kfu;e] 1961 ¼e-ç-½ & /kkjk 23&d ¼d½ & dqVqac esa vfrfFk d{k dh vko‘;drk & vfrfFk dh vko‘;drk ugha gSa] Lo;a Hkw&Lokeh dh vko‘;drk gSA ¿iSjk 18 rFkk 19
R.D. Shukla, J.-- 1. This revision petition is directed against the judgment and order dated 16.9.92 of the Rent Controlling Authority, Indore, whereby the decree of eviction has been passed in favour of the non-applicant-landlord.
2. The brief history or the case is that Smt. Radhabai, the predecessor in interest and mother of present non-applicant filed application under section 23-A of the M.P. Accommodation Control Act (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act') with the assertions that she is a widow and that she bona fide requires the house for the residence of her son and grandsons.
3. The tenant (applicant herein) contested the claim and pleaded that the landlord wants to enhance the rent and she demanded it to be raised to Rs. 100/per month; and that she does not require the house for the residence of herself or her family members. It was also pleaded that the need is not genuine.
4. During the pendency of this application, Smt. Radhabai died and the present non-applicant Shantaram, who is the son of Radhabai was brought on record,
5. The present non-appellant was a Government servant at the time of his substitution as plaintiff in the case, therefore, he pleaded that as a Government servant, he is entitled fur a government accommodation; but since be is posted at Indore and is having his own house, he cannot be allotted with the same.
6. He further pleaded that his sons have become major, they are married and the need has further increased. 'During the pendency of this application, the non-appellant Shantaram retired from service. He, therefore, put forth further facts showing his bona fide need that two of his sons are married and, therefore, he and two of his sons require three rooms and other three rooms are small which arc used as kitchen, storeroom and place of worship. The 'Dhaliya 'lying vacant on the first floor is dilapidated and is presently being used for keeping various sundry articles. He has further submitted that his five daughters are married but because of his large family, his daughters, sun-in-laws and other relations come off-and-on to his place and, therefore, he requires one independent room (presently in occupation of the tenant-applicant) for being used as guest-room fur the residence of his near relations.
7. It appears, out of the rooms referred above, one room was vacated by the tenant and, therefore, further objection was put up by the tenant (applicant); firstly, that the need of Shantaram, present applicant, cannot be looked into as he is not the original plaintiff in the case - he has come after the substitution. Therefore, the need of original landlord Smt. Rudhabai only can be looked into; secondly, after taking the vacant possession of the room occupied by the other tenant, the need is satisfied and now, therefore, he cannot claim further room for receiving his guests and the requirement of his daughters and son-in-laws cannot be taken into account.
8. After hearing the parties, learned Rent Controlling Authority has found:
(i) Since Shantaram, present non-applicant, has been substituted as landlord and has retired also from service and, therefore, the subsequent event can be taken into consideration; (ii) secondly, the seven rooms, allegedly occupied by the non-applicant landlord contains only three living rooms which arc presently being used by the non-applicant Shantaram and his two major married sons and three other rooms arc small one which arc being used as kitchen, store-room and place of worship. The Dhaliya' is unfit fur habitation and is being used for keeping sundry articles and, therefore, the need of the landlord for facilitating the residence of his near relations including his daughters and son-in-laws still exists. As such decree of eviction, as referred above, has been passed in favour of the landlord. Hence this Revision.
9. The main grounds of attack in the revision, as submitted by the learned counsel for the applicant, arc as follows :-
(i) The alleged bona fide requirem
SupremeToday
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
