Deena Nath vs Pooran Lal on 11 July, 2001
7. Learned counsel for the appellant placing
reliance on the judgments passed in the cases of
Deena Nath Vs. Pooran Lal reported in [2001 (4)
M.P.H.T. 203 (SC)] contended that learned first
appellate Court erred in reversing the well reasoned
decree passed by the trial Court dismissing plaintiff's
eviction suit and lower appellate Court has not
properly appreciated and analyzed the evidence
produced by the parties, as it was rightly found
proved by the learned trial Court that plaintiff's son
Abhishek is not unemployed and he is already doing
jewelry business in a part of his father's shoes shop,
which is adjacent to the suit accommodation. It is
submitted that the findings of the courts below are
not concurrent, hence second appeal be admitted for
final hearing after formulating substantial questions
of law.