Khetsidas died issueless.
However, at the end, the Trial Court held the plaintiffs number entitled to decree for eviction inasmuch as the landlord tenant relationship between the plaintiff firm and the tenant was number established.
It appears that the defendant tenant had died during the pendency of first appeal and his legal representatives were brought on record.
The availability of ground under Section 12 1 h and the finding of the Trial Court in that regard was neither challenged in First Appeal number dis lodged by the First Appellate Court.
The suit was directed to be dismissed.
The facts, relevant and number in dispute at this stage, are that the property of which the suit accommodation is a part was owned by late Khetsidas who inducted the defendant as a tenant.
C. Lahoti, J. The tenant is in appeal by special leave, feeling aggrieved by the judgment and decree of the First Appellate Court, maintained by the High Court, directing the tenant to be evicted from the suit accommodation, which is a shop, on the ground available under clauses c and h of sub section 1 of Section 12 of the M.P. Accommodation Control Act, 1961, hereinafter, the Act, for short .
However, he had adopted Prahlad Rai as a son.
