[Cites 5, Cited by 0]
Madhya Pradesh High Court
Vinod Soni vs Smt Pista Devi on 15 December, 2025
Author: Dwarka Dhish Bansal
Bench: Dwarka Dhish Bansal
NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2025:MPHC-GWL:32968
1 SA-2224-2025
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
AT GWALIOR
BEFORE
HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE DWARKA DHISH BANSAL
ON THE 15th OF DECEMBER, 2025
SECOND APPEAL No. 2224 of 2025
VINOD SONI
Versus
SMT PISTA DEVI
Appearance:
Shri Rajeev Shrivastava - Advocate for the appellant.
Shri Devendra Kumar Sharma - Advocate for the respondent.
ORDER
This second appeal under Section 100 of CPC has been preferred by
the appellant/defendant/tenant challenging the judgment and decree dated
14.08.2025 passed by Principal District Judge, Shivpuri, District Shivpuri in
Regular Civil Appeal No.18/2025 affirming the judgment and decree dated
09.01.2025 passed by II Civil Judge Junior Division, District Shivpuri in
Civil Suit No.71A/2023 whereby both the Courts below have concurrently
decreed the respondent/plaintiff's suit for eviction of rented shop on the
grounds available under Section 12(1) (a) and (f) of the M.P.
Accommodation Control Act, 1961, (in short "the Act").
2 . As has been contended by learned counsel for the appellant and
found proved by the Courts below, appellant/defendant has made several
defaults in making deposit of monthly rent and that the respondent/plaintiff is
in need of the rented shop for starting business by her son namely Rajesh
NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2025:MPHC-GWL:32968
2 SA-2224-2025
Goyal and there is no other alternative suitable vacant shop available with
the plaintiff to start the business by her son. Fact remains that there is no
dispute also about relationship of landlord and tenant in between the parties.
3. In the case of Kishore Singh vs. Satish Kumar Singhvi , 2017(3) JLJ
375 , a coordinate Bench of this Court has relied upon the decision of
Hon'ble 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 bonafide requirement do not give rise to any
substantial question of law.
4 . After arguing at length but in view of aforesaid factual and legal
scenario, learned counsel for the appellant/defendant prays for withdrawal of
this second appeal and prays for time upto 31.12.2026 to vacate the rented
shop, which is not disputed by learned counsel for the respondent/plaintiff.
5. In view of the aforesaid unopposed prayer made by learned counsel
for the appellant, however by declining interference in the impugned
judgment and decree passed by the Courts below, this Court deems fit to
grant time for vacating the rented shop/premises upto 31.12.2026 on the
following conditions:-
(i) The appellant/defendant/tenant shall vacate the rented
shop/premises on or before 31.12.2026.
(ii) The appellant/defendant/tenant shall regularly pay
monthly rent to the respondent/landlord and shall also clear all the
dues, if any, including the costs of the litigation, if any, imposed
by Courts below, within a period of 30 days.
NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2025:MPHC-GWL:32968
3 SA-2224-2025
(iii) The appellant/defendant/tenant shall not part with the
rented shop/premises to anybody and shall not change nature of
the same.
(iv) The appellant/defendant/tenant 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/tenant fails to comply with
any of the aforesaid conditions, the respondent/landlord shall be
free to execute the decree forthwith.
(vi) If after filing of the undertaking, the
appellant/defendant/tenant does not vacate the rented
shop/premises on or before 31.12.2026 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.
(vii) It is made clear that the appellant/defendant/tenant
shall not be entitled for further extension of time after 31.12.2026.
6. With the aforesaid conditions, this second appeal is hereby
dismissed as withdrawn.
7. Pending application(s), if any, shall stand disposed of.
(DWARKA DHISH BANSAL)
JUDGE
Rashid
