https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=157303 A common eviction claim under Chapter III-A of the M.P. Accommodation Control Act remained maintainable before the Rent Controlling Authority where a qualified widow joined with major sons who were not themselves within the special category, because the cause of action was common and the substantive claim still fell within the special provision. The Court held that joinder of co-landlords outside Section 23-J did not alter the character of the proceeding or oust jurisdiction. It also accepted the concurrent finding that the landlords genuinely needed the ground-floor shops for business and that the alleged alternatives, including a first-floor premises and tenanted accommodation, were not reasonably suitable. The eviction orders were sustained. en-us Mon, 08 Jul 2002 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 24 Jun 2014 17:45:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=157303 A common eviction claim under Chapter III-A of the M.P. Accommodation Control Act remained maintainable before the Rent Controlling Authority where a qualified widow joined with major sons who were not themselves within the special category, because the cause of action was common and the substantive claim still fell within the special provision. The Court held that joinder of co-landlords outside Section 23-J did not alter the character of the proceeding or oust jurisdiction. It also accepted the concurrent finding that the landlords genuinely needed the ground-floor shops for business and that the alleged alternatives, including a first-floor premises and tenanted accommodation, were not reasonably suitable. The eviction orders were sustained. Case-Laws Indian Laws Mon, 08 Jul 2002 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=157303