Supreme Court - Hukum Chandra vs Nemi Chand Case

 Hukum Chandra (D) Thr. Lrs. vs Nemi Chand Jain - Supreme Court Important Judgment 2018 - 

On 14th December, 2018, in the case of Hukum Chandra (D) Thr. Lrs. v. Nemi Chand Jain & Ors. [Civil Appeal No.3827 of 2014], the judgment and decree passed by the first appellate court for eviction of appellant-tenant, as affirmed by High Court, came up for challenge before the Supreme Court. In the case herein, respondent No.1- landlord had filed a civil suit under Section 12(1)(f) of the Madhya Pradesh Accommodation Control Act, 1961 seeking eviction of the appellant-tenant from the suit shop on the ground of bona fide requirement to settle his son.

The Supreme Court held that the mere fact that the son of respondent no.1 was involved in the business of utensils, “a bona fide need of the premises cannot be doubted.” The Court observed that “it would be inappropriate to expect the son of the respondent–landlord to sit idle without doing any work till the eviction petition is decided on the basis of the bona fide requirement.” It was held that if there is categorical averment by the respondent that the premises is required for his son; “engaging in the business of utensils in the meanwhile, cannot be a ground to deny a decree for eviction.”

On facts, upon consideration of oral and documentary evidence, the first appellate court and the High Court recorded concurrent findings of fact that the suit shop is required bona fide for the son of the landlord for the purpose of doing business and that the respondent – landlord has no other reasonably suitable non-residential accommodation for the business of his son. The Supreme Court did “not find any good ground warranting interference with the impugned judgment” and granted appellanttenant three months’ time “to vacate and handover the possession of the suit property.”