Short Note : 1. The non-applicants-plaintiffs have brought a suit for eviction of the applicant defendant. The suit is based on the relationship of landlord and tenant The eviction is sought on certain grounds i. e., bona fide need, default in payment of arrears of rent and also on the ground of subletting as specified in sub-section (1) of section 12 of the M P. Accommodation Control Act, 1961. The plaintiffs have specifically pleaded that the defendant was their tenant on a monthly rent of Rs. 60/- and while opposing the application for better particulars have stated that the defendant has been paying rent to them after 1-1-1976 up to 30-11-1976 and thus has accepted them as his landlords after the purchase of the house from the previous landlord. As regards the peelings in respect of the allegation of subletting, the plaintiffs have given the names of the persons to whom, according to the plaintiffs, the defendant had sublet a part of the accommodation. Held : In my opinion, no case is made out for interference with the order impugned made by the trial Court in exercise of its discretion. There is no case of irreparable injury, prejudice or miscarriage of justice. The pleadings as stated in the plaint are sufficient to enable the defendant to file reply. As stated by the learned counsel for the non-applicants, the applicant defendant may approach the trial Court for details and better particulars, if necessary, after denying or admitting the basic facts If any such request is made, the trial Court may consider the necessity of particulars in context of the pleadings. Revision dismissed.