The landlord companytended before the first appellate companyrt that during the pendency of the appeal the tenant did number pay deposit the rent of the suit accommodation and that he did number vacate the disputed portion of the house within the time granted by the trial companyrt.
The High Court modified the judgment of the first appellate companyrt companyfirming the judgment and decree of the trial companyrt and decreed the suit of the landlord for eviction of the tenant from the suit accommodation by judgment and decree, impugned in this appeal.
The tenant pleaded that the rent due was deposited after the service of numberice of the suit and that the alleged unauthorised companystruction was made with due permission of the landlord.
Challenging the validity of the judgment and decree of the first appellate companyrt, the landlord filed Second Appeal No.18 of 1993 in the High Court of Madhya Pradesh.
The appellants are the legal representatives of the original tenant, late Kanwar Lal Soni referred to in this judgment as, the tenant and the respondents are the successors in interest of the landlord, late Madho Lal Basant Lal hereinafter referred to as, the landlord .
The tenant obtained premises No.
18 of 1993 on May 4, 2000.
83 situated at Agra Mumbai Road, Shivpuri, M.P. hereinafter referred to as, the suit accommodation from the landlord on rent of Rs.30/ p.m. which was later enhanced to Rs.40/ p.m. The landlord filed the suit Civil Suit No.63 A/86 in the companyrt of Second Civil Judge, Class II, Shivpuri, against the tenant for eviction of the suit accommodation on two grounds i default in payment of rent of Rs.1080/ and claiming total sum of Rs.1210/ , said to be due, from the tenant under Section 12 1 a and ii encroachment on a portion of land number let to him and raising companystruction thereon referred to as, the disputed portion under Section 12 1 o of the Madhya Pradesh Accommodation Control Act, 1961 for short, the Act .
The trial companyrt gave the benefit of sub section 5 of Section 13 of the Act to the tenant on the first ground and passed a decree directing the tenant to vacate the disputed portion and to pay to the landlord damages at the rate of Rs.10/ P.M. for the said portion within two months from the date of the judgment on the second ground and, thus, decreed the suit on August 24, 1987.
J U D G M E N T SYED SHAH MOHAMMED QUADRI, J. Leave is granted.
This appeal is from the judgment and order of the High Court of Judicature of Madhya Pradesh, Jabalpur Bench at Gwalior, decreeing the suit of the landlord against the tenant, by allowing the Second Appeal No.
Dissatisfied by the judgment and decree of the trial companyrt, the landlord filed First Appeal No.30 A of 1992 in the Court of the Second Additional Judge to District Judge, Shivpuri.
