Mahesh Kumar Rawat vs Lallusingh

This appeal by appellant/tenant is directed against the judgment and decree dated 31.01.2012 passed by IV Additional District Judge, Ujjain in Civil Suit No.12-A/10, decreeing the suit of the plaintiff on the ground of arrears of rent under Section 12(1) (a) of M.P. Accommodation Control Act, 1961.

The appellant present in person submits that there is no arrears of rent. In fact, some advance rent has been deposited with the respondent/land lady.

Per contra, Shri Vyas, learned counsel for the respondents submits that appellant is a rank defaulter. There is arrears of rent with effect from 01.02.2016. The appellant/tenant had also committed default during pendencey of this suit. The Court below has dealt with the issue of 'arrears of rent' in detailed in para 10 of the impugned judgment found there is arrears of rent to the tune of Rs.23,000/-. Learned counsel for further submits that default of rent as found by the trial Court cannot be allowed to be cured by the appellant during the appellate proceedings as held by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Ashok Kumar Mishra and another v. Goverdhan Bhai (D) Thr. LRs. and another AIR 2017 SC 1819. Under such circumstances, the decree passed by the trial Court cannot be faulted with.

At this stage, appellant Mahesh Kumar Rawat fairly submits that in the event this Court protects him from eviction for a period of two years, he shall not press the appeal.

Learned counsel for the respondents vehemently opposes such prayer with the submission that appellant has already occupying the suit premises for more than twenty years. He further submits that the landlord has instituted eviction proceedings in the year 2010. He could not reach the fruits of decree of eviction during her life time, instead was forced to face the ordeal by labyrinth of litigation. Thereafter, his wife had to further carry forward the case for eviction and now she herself is a senior citizen and in the evening of her life. Under such circumstances, no further indulgence is warranted in the matter of further detention of suit premises by the appellant/tenant.

Heard.

Upon hearing both the parties and with due regard and respect to the feelings of the respondent/landlady, it is considered apposite to strike balance between the parties and allow the appellant/tenant to continue to occupy the suit premises for eighteen months for the reason that he himself is a senior citizen and his son is undergoing sustained treatment for Tuberculosis.

Accordingly appeal is disposed of with the following directions:

(i) appellant shall continue to occupy the suit premises for eighteen months i.e. till 19th March, 2021 and under the circumstance, no further time shall be granted or extended;

(ii) appellant shall deposit the arrears of rent (if not already deposited) and shall also deposit the rent on 5th day of every month regularly till expiring of eighteen months without default;

(iii) appellant shall not change or alter the suit property in any matter whatsoever;

(iv) appellant shall not create any third party right over the suit property;

(v) appellant shall vacate and handover the vacant peaceful possession of suit premises to the respondent on or before 19/03/2021 without fail;

(vi) any deviation or violation of the aforementioned conditions or for variation, if any, shall entitle the respondent/land lady to approach this Court for eviction of the appellant with Police force;

(vi) appellant shall submit an undertaking to the aforesaid effect within a period of fifteen days from today before the Court below.

With the aforesaid directions, first appeal stands disposed of.