Brajesh Chandra vs Ratanlal
2025 Latest Caselaw 7176 MP

Madhya Pradesh High Court

Brajesh Chandra vs Ratanlal on 26 June, 2025

Author: Dwarka Dhish Bansal

Bench: Dwarka Dhish Bansal

          NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2025:MPHC-JBP:27859




                                                              1                                    SA-3-2000
                              IN     THE     HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
                                                   AT JABALPUR
                                                        BEFORE
                                      HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE DWARKA DHISH BANSAL
                                                   ON THE 26th OF JUNE, 2025
                                                 SECOND APPEAL No. 3 of 2000
                                              BRAJESH CHANDRA
                                                    Versus
                                RATANLAL (DEAD) THROUGH LRS. SMT. ASHA JAIN AND
                                                   OTHERS
                           Appearance:
                              Shri Umesh Shrivastava - Advocate along with appellant Shri Brajesh Chandra
                           Singhal and his son Shri Navneet Singhal, who are present in person.
                              None for the respondents although served and represented.

                                                                  ORDER

This second appeal has been preferred by the appellant/defendant challenging the judgment and decree dated 27.11.1999 passed by 7th Addl. District Judge, Bhopal, in civil appeal no.125A/1999 affirming/modifying the judgment and decree dated 10.02.1999 passed by 3rd Civil Judge Class- II, Bhopal, in civil suit no.49A/1978 whereby trial Court decreed original respondent/plaintiff- Shri Ratanlal (now dead, through LRs)' suit for eviction

on the grounds under Sections 12(1)(a),(b),(c),(f),(k) and (o) of the M.P. Accommodation Control Act, 1961 (in short 'the Act') and in appeal filed by the appellant/defendant, first appellate Court has modified the judgment and decree passed by trial Court and by affirming the decree of eviction on the grounds under Sections 12 (1)(a),(c),(k) and (o) of the Act, refused to pass decree on the grounds under Sections 12(1)(b) & (f) of the Act.

2 . After arguing at length and in view of the concurrent findings of

NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2025:MPHC-JBP:27859

2 SA-3-2000 facts recorded by Courts below in respect of decree of eviction passed on the said grounds of the Act, learned counsel for the appellant in presence of the appellant-Brajesh Chandra Singhal himself, prays for withdrawal of this second appeal and prays for two years time i.e. upto 30.06.2027 to vacate the suit shop including the encroached portion.

3 . Nobody is appearing on behalf of respondents to oppose the prayer made on behalf of the appellant.

4 . As such and looking to the grounds of eviction, this Court deems fit to grant time to the appellant/defendant/tenant for vacating the rented/suit shop up to 30.06.2027 on the following conditions : -

(i) The appellant/defendant/tenant shall vacate the rented shop on or

before 30.06.2027 .

(ii) The appellant/defendant/tenant shall regularly pay monthly rent to the respondents/plaintiffs/landlord and shall also clear all the dues, if any, including the costs of the litigation, if any, imposed by Court below, within a period of 30 days.

(iii) The appellant/defendant/tenant shall not part with the suit shop 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 respondents/plaintiffs/landlord shall be free to execute the decree forthwith.

NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2025:MPHC-JBP:27859

3 SA-3-2000

(vi) If after filing of the undertaking, the appellant/defendant/tenant does not vacate the suit/rented shop on or before 30.06.2027 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 30.06.2027 .

5 . Accordingly, declining interference in the decree of eviction passed by Courts below, second appeal is dismissed/disposed off.

6 . Miscellaneous application(s), pending if any, shall stand closed.

(DWARKA DHISH BANSAL) JUDGE

pb