Harsh Sharma vs Satyendra Singh & Another

This second appeal has been filed against the judgement and decree dated 28.09.2016 passed by the Additional District Judge, Khandwa in Civil Appeal No. 6-A of 2015 arising out of the judgement and decree dated 20.12.2014 passed by the First Civil Judge Class-I, Khandwa in Civil Suit No. 24-A of 2014 wherein the Trial Court granted decree in favour of the respondent/plaintiff under Section 12(1)(e) of the MP Accommodation Control Act, 1961.

In brief, the facts of the case are that, the respondent/plaintiff is the owner of the house situated in Mohalla Kundleshwar Ward Khandwa, behind house of Dr. Ubeja. Appellant/defendant was the tenant of the suit house at a monthly rent of Rs. 900/- since the earlier owner of the house. The respondent/plaintiff purchased the disputed house from the landlord for his personal use along with his children. He has bonafide need of this house and he has no alternate house in the city, which would be sufficient for his family members. He made an oral request to the appellant/defendant to vacate the house. She denied to vacate the same and took the plea that respondent/plaintiff does not have a bonafide need of suit house. Hence, the respondent/plaintiff filed eviction suit against the appellant/defendant.

Learned Trial Court found that the respondent/plaintiff has bonafide need of the disputed house for he has no alternative residence for his family. He was residing in a house with his mother, brother and other joint members of family which was not adequate for his requirement. He had no sufficient accommodation available for his residence at Khandwa. Hence, learned Trial Court passed the decree under Section 12(1)(e) in favour of the respondent/plaintiff and directed eviction of the appellant/defendant, from the suit house within two months. It was also held that respondent/plaintiff is entitled to receive regular rent from the date of institution of the appeal till its final disposal at the rate of Rs. 900/- per month.

The appellant filed first appeal against the above decree passed by Trial Court which was dismissed vide judgement dated 28.09.2016, confirming the findings of the learned Trial Court.

Being aggrieved by the judgement and decree passed by the lower Courts, this second appeal has been preferred by the appellant/defendant on the grounds that the respondent/plaintiff lives in a joint family in a three storied house and there is sufficient accommodation available to him. Plaintiff/respondent demanded Rs. 3000/- as rent which the appellant tenant refused to pay the plaintiff/respondent stopped taking rent from her. It is further prayed that both the Courts below have committed serious error of law by passing decree of eviction in favour of the plaintiff.

A perusal of the records reveal that the respondent has no alternate accommodation under his possession in the city of Khandwa. The appellant/defendant has herself submitted that presently the respondent/plaintiff is residing with other members of his joint family. She also admitted that the respondent is residing at first floor in a single room with his family.

In view of the aforesaid, the concurrent findings of fact arrived at by the two courts below do not suffer from any illegality or infirmities. No substantial question of law arises for consideration in this second appeal, which fails and is hereby dismissed.