R. C. Lahoti, J. -
(2.)The suit premises in these two appeals are two shops situated in M. T. Cloth Market, Indore on the ground-floor of a building. The property was owned by later Krishnadas. He inducted the two appellants in the two shops as tenants for non-residential purpose. Krishnadas died on 8-7-1995. His ownership and right of reversion as landlord have devolved on his widow Smt. Kalawatibai and two sons Govinda and Hemant. These three are the respondents in these appeals. They initiated the proceedings for eviction of the two appellants in December, 1995. The case of the respondents is that the shop in the occupation of appellant Dhannalal is required bona fide for starting the business of Govinda, the respondent No. 2, while the shop in the occupation of the other appellant, M/s. Tulsidas Sureshchandra is required by the respondent Hemant for shifting and continuing his readymade garments business which he is presently running in a rented accommodation situated in Gorakund locality, at a little distance from the building in question. It is alleged that the respondents do not own or possess any other accommodation of their own suitable to satisfy their alleged requirement. These proceedings for eviction were initiated under Chapter III-A of M. P.Accommodation Control Act, 1961 (hereinafter the Act, for short) by filing applications before the Rent Controlling Authority, Indore (RCA, for short). The two appellants contested the claim preferred by the respondents. However, the R.C.A. found the claims for eviction proved and dircted the two appellants to be evicted. Both the appellants preferred revision petitions under Section 23-E of the Act before the High Court. The High Court, having dealt with each of the contentions raised on behalf of the revision petitioners, has dismissed the revision petitions upholding the orders of the R.C.A. Feeling aggrieved thereby these appeals have been filed by special leave.
(3.)Two questions arise for decision in these appeals; firstly, whether looking at the nature of requirement pleaded by the landlord-respondents in their applications the forum of Rent Controlling Authority was available to the respondents under Chapter III-A of the Act or whether they were required to have recourse to the jurisdiction of Civil Court by filing suits for eviction under Section 12 of the Act; and secondly, whether the landlords have succeeded in making out case of bona fide requirement of the suit premises within the meaning of clause (b) of Section 23-A of the Act.