( 1. ) THIS is a revision under Section 23-E of the M. P. Accommodation Control Act, 1961 (Act for short) challenging the order of Rent Controlling Authority (R. C. A. for short) dated 12-12-2002 in case No. A-90 (7) 43/01 (Smt. Kamla Bai v. Sita Bai and 2 others) in which petitioners are ordered to vacate the disputed 3 rooms with an otla in front. Ground taken had been bonafide requirement for non-residential purpose of Ku. Alka Shukla (AW-2) a major daughter of the non-applicant, widow (landlady) falling within the definition of special category of landlords as defined under Section 23-J of the Act.

( 2. ) THE learned Advocate for petitioners has argued that admittedly the disputed rooms were let out for residential purpose and without express consent of the non-applicant (landlady) the same were used wholly or partly for non-residential purpose and thus as an effect of explanation to Section 23-A (a) of the Act the disputed shops could be got vacated only for residential need of the non-applicant and not for non-residential need. B. The non-applicant had not proved that she is an owner of the disputed rooms and without such proof she was not entitled for eviction under e