D.P.S. Chauhan, J.

The present revision is directed against the order dated 21.4.92 passed by the Rent Controlling Authority Katni in Case No. 3/A-90 (7) of 91-92 refusing leave to defend and passing decree for eviction.

Smt. Premlata Jacob moved the Authority under the Madhya Pradesh Accommodation Control Act, 1961 (for brevity hereinafter referred to as the) u/s 23-A for the ejectment of the tenant Santosh Kumar Jaiswal (applicant). The application for ejectment was made claiming the priority Clause under Chapter III-A of the under Section 23-J wherein a special definition of the landlord for the purposes of Chapter III-A of the is provided. Section 23-J is extracted below -

23-J. Definition of landlord for the purposes of Chapter III-A -For the purports of this Chapter landlord means a landlord who is -

(i) a retired servant of any Government including a retired member of Defence Services; or

(ii) a retired servant of a company owned or controlled either by the Central or State Government; or

(iii) a widow or a divorced wife; or

(iv) physically handicapped person; or

(v) a servant of any Government including a member of Defence services who according to his service conditions, is not entitled to Government accommodation on his posting to a place where he owns a house or is entitled to such accommodation only on payment of a penal rent on his posting to such a place.

Smt. Premlata moved the Authority under the on the ground that she was a widow. The Authority after considering the matter on merit, allowed the application of the landlord and directed for the ejectment of the tenant vide order dated 21.4.92 passed in the case No. 3/A-90 (7) of 91-92. This order is sought to be revised in the present revision, at the behest of the tenant Santosh Kumar Jaiswal.

During the pendency of the proceedings before this Court, Smt. Premlata who was landlord, died and this Court on 29.11.94 allowed the substitution of Smt. Premlata Jacob.

The important question for consideration, as is raised in this case, is whether the heirs and LRs of Smt. Premlata Jacob are entitled for the benefit of the special provision regarding ejectment of the tenant. In this connection, learned counsel for the applicant submitted that the word "landlord" as defined u/s 2 (b) of the is the general definition of the landlord but he submitted that under Section 23- A a special provision is made for certain category of persons. That category of persons is provided in Section 23-J where the landlord is separately defined.

Learned counsel for the opposite party submitted that so far as the question of heirs and LRs are concerned, they are not covered in the special category of persons provided in Section 23-J and as such, they will be governed by the general provision as contained in Section 12 (1) of theand not as contained in Chapter III-A of the.

So far as the definition of the landlord under the general provision is concerned, the proposition regarding the limit on the definition of the landlord is no more res integra. The suit was filed by Smt. Premlata Jacob under special provision in the capacity as a Widow and that capacity was the basis for filing an application for ejectment, then, it is only that capacity which can maintain by the application. The moment the capacity vanishes, the application would become non-maintainable. In the present case, during the pendency of the proceedings, Smt. Premlata died. Her capacity as a Widow vanished. The heirs and LRs cannot step in the capacity of the Widow and therefore, they are not entitled to take advantage of the said capacity.

So far as the need is concerned, there is a separate provision under the and they can resort to that separate provision i.e. Section 12 of the. Since the capacity of Smt. Premlata has vanished on account of her death, the application for ejectment as a special category of person becomes non-est.

In view of above, the revision application is allowed. The order dated 21.4.92 passed by the Rent Controlling Authority Katni in Case No. 3/A-90 (7) of 91-92 is set aside. However, it is made clear that this order will not cause any impediment on the rights of the heirs and LRs of Smt. Premlata Jacob for approaching the concerned Authority or the Court for appropriate relief to which they are entitled to under the law. No order as to costs.