R.C. Lahoti, J. -- 1. A learned Judge (P.P. Naolekar, J.) of this Court while hearing a second appeal has found it difficult to subscribe to the view taken by another learned Judge of this Court sitting singly, in Lalta Prasad v. Ramcharan [1986 JLJ 713 = 1989 MPU 233]. He has referred the following two questions for consideration by a Division Bench, which have been placed before us by Hon'ble the Chief Justice:

"1. Whether to be member of the family within section 2 (e) of the M.P. Accommodation Control Act, 1961, it is necessary to live jointly with the landlord and 'joint living' means actual living or residing continuously with landlord?

2. Whether separated son or other member as mentioned under Sec. 2 (e) of the M.P. Accommodation Control Act, 1961, are members of the family for the purpose of section 2 (e) of the M.P. Accommodation Control Act, 1961?"

2. The brief facts of the case are these: The respondent Balram is admittedly a landlord of the suit accommodation. He has two sons, namely, Rohit Prasad and Govind Prasad, both employees of the University of Jabalpur living in rented houses in Jabalpur on account of great paucity of accommodation with the father/landlord.