2011 (2) TMI 1628 - HC - Indian Laws

Summary

Issues Involved:
1. Maintainability of proceedings u/s 23-A(b) of the M.P. Accommodation Control Act, 1961.
2. Compliance with mandatory provisions u/s 23-B and 23-C(1) of the Act.
3. Validity of the eviction order passed by the Rent Controlling Authority (RCA).

Summary:

1. Maintainability of Proceedings u/s 23-A(b) of the Act:
The Applicants/tenants contended that the proceedings u/s 23-A(b) of the Act were not maintainable as the non-Applicant/landlady had set up the need for her grandson, which is not covered under the provision that allows eviction for the requirement of a major son or unmarried daughter. The court, however, noted that Section 23-A(b) also includes "any person for whose benefit the accommodation is held," thus covering the grandson.

2. Compliance with Mandatory Provisions u/s 23-B and 23-C(1) of the Act:
The Applicants argued that the RCA failed to issue summons in the prescribed format as required u/s 23-B(1) of the Act, which mandates that tenants be informed of their obligation to file an application seeking leave to contest within fifteen days. The court emphasized that Section 23-B is mandatory, and non-compliance with this provision invalidates the eviction order. The notice served did not conform to the Second Schedule, failing to inform the tenants of the need to file an application supported by an affidavit within fifteen days.

3. Validity of the Eviction Order:
The RCA's order dated 25-6-2010 was challenged on the grounds of procedural lapses. The court held that the eviction order could not be sustained due to the RCA's failure to issue a proper notice as mandated by Section 23-B. The court quashed the eviction order and directed the Applicants to appear before the RCA with an application u/s 23-C(1) of the Act and an application for condonation of delay. The RCA was instructed to decide the application within one week and conclude the proceedings by 31-5-2011.

Conclusion:
The court quashed the RCA's eviction order due to non-compliance with mandatory procedural requirements and directed the Applicants to reappear before the RCA with the necessary applications. The RCA was instructed to expedite the proceedings and conclude them by a specified date.