A.P. Sen, J.- 1. Points of law urged in the appeal may be shortly stated, relying on the Kirayanama dated 1-11-55, it is urged that the demised premises having been let for a composite purpose, i.e., for non-residential as well as residential purposes, in the absence of a specific provision made in that behalf in section 12(1) of the Madhya Pradesh Accommodation Control Act, 1961, the plaintiff's suit for ejectment based on his composite need, is not maintainable. The demised premises is situate in the heart of the business locality in Satna town. The defendant is a partnership firm carrying on cloth business from the ground floor, and the first floor is used for residential purposes. The Kirayanama Ex. P.1, shows the creation of a composite lease on a monthly rent of Rs. 250. It is urged that the contract of tenancy is one and indivisible, and in the absence of any statutory provision to that effect, it is not open to the Court to divide it into two contracts one of letting for nonresidential purposes, and the other for residential purposes, and to grant relief under clauses (e) or (f) of sub-section (1) of section 12 of the Act. It is said that unlike the Delhi and Ajmer