- (1.)ONE of us (Bajpai, J.) had referred the following question for being decided by a larger Bench:-" whether in compliance with the requirement of Sub-section (1) of section 13, is it necessary for the defendant-tenant to pay to the landlord or deposit in Court the amount of arrears of rent, the recovery of which has become barred by limitation and which the landlord-plaintiff on his part cannot recover by process in the Court? " a bench of three Judges heard the reference and by unanimous opinion dated nov. 19, 1977 (reported in AIR 1978 Madh Pra 54 (FB)) answered the question in the negative. It was held:--
"the tenant is not obliged to deposit time-barred rent under the first part of Section 13 (1) of the M. P. Accommodation Control Act, 1961. " thereafter, when this Second Appeal was placed before the Single Bench, the learned counsel for the appellants relied on a decision of the Supreme Court in khadi Gram Udyog Trust v. Shri Ram Chandraji Virajman Mandir, Civil Appeal no. 1313 of 1977, D/- 28-11-1977 : (reported in AIR 1978 SC 287 ). It was urged for the appellants that the Supreme Court decision runs counter to the opinion of the Full Bench of this Court. The Single Bench then referred the following question for being answered by a larger Bench:-"whether, in the light of the observations made by the Supreme court in the case of Khadi Gram Udyog Trust v. Shri Ram Chandraji virajman Mandir (AIR 1978 SC 287), the opinion of the larger Bench given on 19-11-1977 : (reported in AIR 1978 Madh Pra 54 (FB)) in this appeal, cannot hold the field and the tenant-defendant is bound to deposit even the time barred arrears of rent in compliance with the provisions of Section 13 (11 and (2) of the M. P. Accommodation control Act. 1961 ?"

(2.)THE question then came before this larger Bench.
(3.)SECTION 12 of the M. P. Accommodation Control Act, 1961 (hereinafter called the Act) Imposes restrictions on eviction of tenants even when tenancy is determined under the general law. This section bars a suit for eviction of a tenant notwithstanding anything to the contrary contained in any other law or contract, except on one or more of the grounds E (a) to (p) contained in Subsection (1 ). For the purposes of the present question and for facilitating the discussion. suffice to reproduce three of them:--"12. Restriction on eviction of tenants.-- (1) Notwithstanding anything to the contrary contained in any other law or contract, no suit shall be filed in any Civil Court against a tenant for Ms eviction from any accommodation except on one or more of the following grounds only, namely :-- (a) that the tenant has neither paid nor tendered the whole of the arrears of the rent legally recoverable from him within two months of the date on which a notice of demand for the arrears of rent has been served on him by the landlord in the prescribed manners (b) x x x x (c) x x x: x (d) x x x x required bona fide by the landlord for occupation as a residence for himself or for any member of his family, if he is the owner thereof, or for any person for whose benefit the accommodation is held and that the landlord or such person has no other reasonably suitable residential accommodation of his own in his occupation in the city or town concerned: (f) x x x x (g) x x x x (h) that the accommodation is required bona fide by the landlord for the purpose of building or rebuilding or making thereto any substantial additions or alterations and that such building or rebuilding or alterations cannot be carried out without the accommodation being vacated; x X X X (2) x x x x (3) No order for the eviction of a tenant shall be made on the ground specified in Clause (a) of Sub-section (1), if the tenant makes payment or deposit as required by Section 13 : provided that no tenant shall be entitled to the benefit under this subsection, if, having obtained such benefit once in respect of any accommodation, he again makes a default in the payment of rent of that accommodation for three consecutive months. x x x x". " (7) No order for the eviction of a tenant shall be made on 'the ground specified in Clause (h) of Sub-section (1), unless the Court is satisfied that the proposed reconstruction will not radically alter the purpose for which the accommodation was let or that radical alteration is in the public Interest, and that the plans and estimates of such reconstruction have been properly prepared and that necessary funds for the purpose are available with the landlord, x x x x"