JUDGEMENT

Although, both the second appeals are arising out of two different civil suits but in both the civil suits landlord is common; building in which disputed shops are situated is common; need for both the shops for plaintiff’s son-Deepak Nayak is common; impugned judgment and decree having identical paragraphs, have been delivered on same dates/by same judges; grounds of eviction and arguing advocates as well as arguments are common, therefore, both the second appeals are being decided by this common judgment.

2. Aforementioned second appeal(s) have been preferred by the appellant(s)/tenant(s) challenging judgment and decree dated 25.03.2014 passed by 14th Additional District Judge, Bhopal in RCA No. 119/2013 and 117/2013 affirming judgment and decree dated 06.03.2013 passed by 13th Civil Judge Class-I, Bhopal in Civil Suit No. 181-A/2009 and 180- A/2009 (respectively) whereby in the respondent/plaintiff’s suit for eviction filed on the grounds under section 12(1)(a),(c),(f) & (h) of the M.P. Accommodation Control Act, 1961 (in short 'the Act'), trial Court passed decree of eviction on the grounds under Section 12(1)(f) & (h) of the Act, which in civil appeal