( 1. ) THIS appeal has been filed by the landlord against the reversing judgment and decree of the First Appellate Court passed in Civil Appeal No. 59-A/2003 decided on 18. 2. 2005 whereby the judgment and decree passed by the Ninth Civil Judge, Class-II, Jabalpur, in Civil Suit No. 5-A/97 decided on 22. 4. 2002 has been reversed and the suit filed by the landlord/plaintiff for eviction has been dismissed.

( 2. ) THIS Court had admitted this second appeal on the following substantial question of law: "1. Whether non-examination of the plaintiff was fatal to the eviction suit, when her son Dr. Sanjeev Sarkar and his wife Dr. Rupa Sarkar were examined to prove their bonafide need ?"

( 3. ) AT the time of hearing it is observed that the following additional substantial questions of law also arise for adjudication in this appeal namely:

"2]. Whether the First Appellate Court has committed gross error of law by ignoring the extensive and cogent evidence on record in respect of bonafide need of the son of the appellant/plaintiff while allowing the appeal filed by the tenant ? and 3]. Whether in the absence of any pleading in the plaint, as amended by the appellant/plaintiff that in