KHAN J.

( 1. ) - Petitioner Giyasilal (after his death, Harnarain and Santoshilal were placed on the record as legal representatives) filed the suit against defendant Kanhaiyalal, his tenant seeking eviction from the rented premises (a shop) on the ground that the shop was genuinely required by him to set up his son in business as a cloth merchant. The defence was that the notice served by the plaintiff is invalid, and, that the plaintiff does not genuinely require the accommodation. The trial Court decreed the suit. On appeal the learned District Judge, Gwalior, recorded a curious finding to the effect that because the plaintiff had inherited a flourishing money lending business from their deceased father, and, was already running a grocery business, therefore, it does not stand to reason why he wants to start a new cloth business. The plea of genuine necessity has been negatived on the ground that if a man is doing one business, then he is not supposed to start or do another business. There is neither rhyme nor reason in the assumption and I regard the finding as perverse. The first appellate Court also held that the notice to quit given by the plaintiff was invalid and