Sunil Kumar vs Shreeyansh Jain
2023 Latest Caselaw 1223 MP

                                                        1
                                IN    THE      HIGH COURT OF MADHYA
                                                   PRADESH
                                                 AT JABALPUR
                                                 BEFORE
                                HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE DWARKA DHISH BANSAL
                                           ON THE 20 th OF JANUARY, 2023
                                           SECOND APPEAL No. 1220 of 2014

                          BETWEEN:-
                          SUNIL KUMAR S/O LATE SHRI RADHELAL
                          AGRAWAL, AGED ABOUT 44 YEARS, SINGHWAHINI
                          WARD MANDLA TAH AND DISTT. MANDLA
                          (MADHYA PRADESH)

                                                                                  .....APPELLANT
                          (BY SHRI ASHOK LALWANI-ADVOCATE )

                          AND
                          1.    SHREEYANSH JAIN S/O SHRI RAJENDRA
                                KUMAR JAIN, AGED ABOUT 33 YEARS, RANI
                                DURGAWATI WARD MANDLA TAH AND
                                DISTT. MANDLA (MADHYA PRADESH)

                          2.    DR KRISHNADEV BURMAN S/O LATE SHRI
                                BHAKTRAM DEV, AGED ABOUT 40 YEARS,
                                MEDICAL COLLEGE JABALPUR (MADHYA
                                PRADESH)

                                                                               .....RESPONDENTS
                          (BY SHRI YUVRAJ VAIDYA-ADVOCATE )

                                This appeal coming on for admission this day, th e court passed
                          the following:
                                                         ORDER

This second appeal has been preferred by appellant/defendant-1 Sunil Kumar challenging the judgment and decree dated 18.11.2014 passed by Additional District Judge, Mandla in civil appeal no.5-A/2010 confirming

Signature Not Verified Signed by: S HUSHMAT HUSSAIN Signing time: 1/25/2023 10:26:51 AM

the judgment and decree dated 14.10.2008 passed by Civil Judge Class-I, Mandla in civil suit no.2-A/2001, whereby learned Courts below have decreed the suit for eviction on the ground under Section 12(1)(f) of the Madhya Pradesh Accommodation Control Act, 1961 along with mesne profits.

2. Learned Courts below have after having considered the entire material available on record held that the plaintiff is in bonafide need of the suit accommodation for starting cloth business and there is no alternative accommodation available with the plaintiff for starting business.

3 . In the case of Kishore Singh Vs. Satish Kumar Singhvi 2017(3) JLJ 375 coordinate bench of this Court has relied upon the decision of Supreme Court in the case of Ragavendra Kumar Vs. Firm Prem Machinary and Company AIR 2000 SC 534 and held that the findings recorded on the question of bona fide requirement do not give rise to any substantial question of law. As such, there does not appear any substantial question of law involved in this second appeal.

4 . At this stage, learned counsel for the appellant prays that he may be granted one year time to vacate the tenanted premises/suit shop, which has not been opposed by the counsel appearing on behalf of the respondent 1.

5. In view of the prayer made on behalf of the appellant for granting time to vacate the tenanted premises/shop, in the interest of justice and looking to the period and nature of tenancy, about one year time for vacating the tenanted premises is granted on the following conditions:-

(i) The appellant/defendant shall vacate the suit shop on or before 31.01.2024.

(ii) The appellant/defendant shall regularly pay rent to the respondent

Signature Not Verified Signed by: S HUSHMAT HUSSAIN Signing time: 1/25/2023 10:26:51 AM

1/landlord and shall also clear all the dues, if any, including the costs of the litigation, if any, imposed by the learned Courts below.

(iii) The appellant 1/defendant shall not part with the suit shop to anybody and shall not change nature of the suit shop.

(iv) The appellant/defendant shall furnish an undertaking with regard to the aforesaid conditions within a period of three weeks before the learned Court below/Executing Court.

(v) If the appellant/defendant fails to comply with any of the aforesaid conditions, the respondent 1/plaintiff shall be free to execute the decree forthwith.

(vi) If after filing of the undertaking, the appellant/defendant does not vacate the suit shop on or before 31.01.2024 and creates any obstruction, he shall be liable to pay mesne profits of Rs.500/- per day, so also contempt of order of this Court.

6. With the aforesaid observation, this second appeal is hereby dismissed and disposed off. No order as to costs.

7. Interim application(s), if any, shall stand dismissed.

(DWARKA DHISH BANSAL) JUDGE sh

Signature Not Verified Signed by: S HUSHMAT HUSSAIN Signing time: 1/25/2023 10:26:51 AM