Madhya Pradesh High Court
Sunil Tiwari vs Mathura Prasad Soni on 3 May, 2019
1 CR-250-2019
The High Court Of Madhya Pradesh
CR-250-2019
(SUNIL TIWARI Vs MATHURA PRASAD SONI)
Jabalpur, Dated : 03-05-2019
Mr. Siddharth Gulatee, Advocate for the applicant.
Mr. Pushpendra Yadav, Advocate for the non-applicant No.1. Heard on admission.
This revision is filed under Section 23-E of the M.P. Accommodation Control Act, 1961 (for short the "Act of 1961") questioning the legal propriety of the order dated 04.01.2019 passed by the Rent Controlling Authority (Authority) in Case No.1/RCA/16-17, thereby directing to vacant the flat of non-applicant No.1 and pay the arrears of rent to the non-applicant No.1 within stipulated time.
Mr. Gulatee, learned counsel for the applicant submits that non- applicant No.1 filed an application under Section 23-A of the Act of 1961 before the Authority and impleaded non-applicants No.2 & 3 only. The present applicant was in possession of the property in question but was not impleaded by the non-applicant No.1. The present applicant is the real "person aggrieved". He has been residing in the accommodation concerned for more than 20 years. The applicant is residing in the said premises under his own independent right. Attention of this Court is drawn to certain documents i.e., society notices, receipt, corporation receipt which are cumulatively filed as Annexure-A/4. On the strength of these documents, Mr. Gulatee urged that the applicant is in continuous possession over the accommodation concerned. Thus, within the meaning of Section 23-E of the Act of 1961, the applicant is a "person aggrieved". The authority below without awaiting the inspection report informing about real possession on the accommodation, decided the matter.
Mr. Gulatee, during the course of hearing on more than one Digitally signed by SAIFAN KHAN Date: 04/05/2019 13:48:38 2 CR-250-2019 occasion contended that the present applicant and non-applicant Nos.2 & 3 are family members/close relatives. The non-applicant No.2 herein is wife of Late Shri Anil Tiwari, whereas non-applicant No.3 is son of Late Shri Anil Tiwari. Shri Anil Tiwari was real brother of present applicant. It is repeatedly urged during oral submissions that applicant was initially in possession of Flat No.57, which is adjacent to Flat No.55 which was subject matter of adjudication before the authority below. Since in Flat No.55 the non-applicant Nos.2 & 3 were residing who are family members of applicant, the applicant and family members removed the dividing wall between Flat Nos.55 & 57 and thus it became one accommodation. Thus, applicant automatically come in possession of Flat No.55 also. Without hearing the applicant the Court below should not have passed the impugned order.
Per-contra, Shri Pushpendra Yadav, learned counsel for the non- applicant No.1 supported the impugned order and urged that the authority below has exercised power under Section 23-A of the Act of 1961 which is part of Chapter III-A. This chapter contains a special provision for eviction of tenants on the ground of bonafide need. The necessary ingredients for invoking the said provision were satisfied and, therefore, authority has rightly passed the impugned order. The non-applicants No.2 & 3 did not assailed the said order. It cannot be believed that present applicant, a family member of non-applicants No.2 & 3, residing with him, was not aware of the proceedings before the authority below. He vehemently opposed this revision.
No other point has been pressed by the learned counsel for the parties.
I have heard the parties at length and perused the record. The applicant has filed certain documents as Annexure-A/4. Most of these documents are issued by Betwa Welfare Society, wherein flat in Digitally signed by SAIFAN KHAN Date: 04/05/2019 13:48:38 3 CR-250-2019 question is situated. Apart from this, two documents of same date i.e., 30.08.2016 are filed, whereby the applicant preferred an application before the Commissioner, Nagar Nigam, Bhopal with a request to permit him to deposit the water tax. Pertinently, in both the applications aforesaid the applicant described himself as owner of Flats No. 55 & 57 of Betwa Apartment. In the instant case, the applicant has not filed any document to show his ownership/title on Flat No.55. No details are mentioned as to how he obtained possession of Flats No.55 & 57. Interestingly, the oral arguments advanced by Mr. Gulatee that dividing wall between two flats was removed is not based on any pleading in the instant revision. The correspondence by Society and receipt etc. cannot be a proof of any valid possession of applicant on Flat No.55. I find substantial force in the arguments of Mr. Yadav that if as per applicant's own contention the dividing wall was removed and he was staying under one roof with non-applicants No.2 & 3, it is not possible to accept the contention of applicant that he was not aware about the proceedings which resulted into issuance of impugned order dated 04.01.2019 (Annexure-A/3). The authority below has considered the matter within the four corners of enabling provision. No jurisdictional error, perversity or procedural impropriety could be established by the applicant.
At the cost of repetition, the applicant could not establish any right of title, possession etc. over Flat No.55. This revision is filed in order to deprive the non-applicant No.1 from the fruits of the impugned order. The applicant herein has no right to raise eyebrows against the impugned orders. The revision is frivolous in nature and is aimed to deprive a retired government servant/non-applicant No.1 from the benefit of special provision ingrained in Chapter III of the Act of 1961. Thus, I deem it proper to dismiss this revision with Rs.10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand Only) as cost. The applicant shall deposit the cost before the Digitally signed by SAIFAN KHAN Date: 04/05/2019 13:48:38 4 CR-250-2019 Secretary, M.P. State Legal Services Authority within 30 days from today. The said authority shall donate this amount to Permanent Artificial Organ Transplantation Center, Netaji Subhash Chandra Bose Medical College, Jabalpur.
Accordingly, present revision is dismissed with cost.
(SUJOY PAUL) JUDGE s@if Digitally signed by SAIFAN KHAN Date: 04/05/2019 13:48:38