- (1.)By this second appeal filed under Section 100 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (for short 'CPC'), the appellants have challenged the legality and propriety of the judgement and decree dated 2.4.93 passed by the 3rd Additional District Judge, Bastar at Jagdalpur, in Civil Appeal No. 1A/91, reversing the judgement and decree by the Additional Civil Judge Class -1, Jagdalpur, in Civil Suit No. 25A/89.
(2.)The present second appeal has been admitted for consideration on the following substantial questions of law: -
1. Whether a residential accommodation and an accommodation situated in the back side of the house can be said to be a suitable alternative accommodation when the requirement is one of non -residen(sic) accommodation situated on the front side of the house?

2. Whether: her the finding of the lower appellate Court, reversing a the finding of the trial Court on the question of genuine necessity is liable to be set aside, as the reversal process on irrelevant considerations?

(3.)As per pleadings of the parties, suit accommodation situated at Jagdalpur was given on rent by Vinayak Das Patjoshi, father of the appellants to the respondent for non - residential purpose. On the ground of bona fide need for starting the office of advocate of appellant Dineshchandra Joshi, suit for eviction was filed before 2nd Civil Judge Class - II, Jagdalpur. The present respondent has denied the allegation and has pleaded that the appellants are in possession of suitable alternative accommodation for running the office of advocate, therefore, they are not bona fide need of suit accommodation for non - residential purpose. After providing opportunity of hearing to the parties, learned Additional Civil Judge, Class -I, Jagdalpur has decreed the suit which was challenged before the lower appellate Court and vide judgement and decree impugned, learned lower appellate Court has reversed the judgement and decree of the trial Court on the ground that the appellants have not specifically pleaded and proved that the accommodation situated in the back side of suit accommodation was not sufficient to fulfill the requirement.