JUDGMENT A suit for ejectment of the defendant-appellant filed by the plaintiff-respondent seeking ejectment on the ground available under section 12 (1) (e) of the M.P. Accommodation Control Act, 1961 has been decreed by the lower appellate Court. The aggrieved defendant has come up in second appeal. On 4.7.1988 this Court admitted the appeal for hearing parties on the following singular substantial question of law: "Whether the lower appellate Court was, on the facts and circumstances of the case, justified in granting a decree for eviction under section 12 (1) (e) of the M.P. Accommodation Control Act, 1961?" It is not disputed that plaintiff-respondent is the owner-cum-landlord of the suit premises. The finding of fact recorded by the lower appellate Court upon an appreciation of evidence adduced by the parties is that there are· twelve members in the family of the plaintiff-respondent consisting of the plaintiff, his wife, their six children, of whom one is married and the parents. The large family has been squeezing itself into a small accommodation consisting of four rooms. The additional accommodation in occupation of the defendant-appellant is required by them to have a comfortable living which really speaking is just a necessity for the family of the plaintiff. The plea of the defendant-appellant that the plaintiff-respondent was having some more accommodation in his possession has been found to be false. All the findings recorded by the Courts below are those of facts and hence immune from challenge in second appeal. Strictly speaking there is hardly any question of law-much less a substantial one arising for decision in the appeal. The appeal is wholly devoid of any merit and liable to be dismissed. It is dismissed accordingly with cost" confirming the judgment and decree of the lower appellate Court. Counsel's fee as per schedule, if certified. However, to relieve the defendant-appellant from the hardship of sudden ejectment, it is directed that the ejectment part of the decree under appeal shall not be available for execution for a period of six months subject to the appellant filing an undertaking on affidavit before the executing Court within a period of one month from today in the following terms: (1) That the appellant shall hand over vacant and peaceful possession over the accommodation in his occupation to the plaintiff-respondent on or before 21.7.1994. (2) That on or before 21.2.1994, he shall deposit for payment to the plaintiff-respondent the entire money part of the decree under appeal including arrears of rent calculated upto date. (3) That with effect from 1.2.1994 on or before the expiry of fifteenth day of every month, he shall deposit the rent for that month for payment to the landlord. (4) On failure to file the affidavit or on fai1ure to comply with any of the terms abovesaid, the decree of ejectment shall be available for execution forthwith.