JUDGMENT T.S. Doabia, J. 1. The appellant has suffered a decree of eviction under section 12 (1) (e) of the Madhya Pradesh Accommodation Control Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as the Act). The Courts below have found that the need of the plaintiff/landlord is bona fide. The trial Court accordingly decreed the suit. The judgment and decree stands affirmed by the appellate Court. This appeal has been filed against the concurrent findings recorded by the both the Courts below. 2. The facts which have come on the record and which were made the basis for passing a decree of eviction be noticed. 3. The landlord has appeared as P.W. 1 He has projected his need as under: The description of the house has been given in para 1 of the statement. According to him, the house in question is a double storey building. On the ground floor there is an Oil Mill. The accommodation which is there on the ground floor is being used as a godown also. There are other tenants also. These are Kaptan Singh, He sells betal leaves- (Pan). The tenancy of other shop is with the transport company. In para 2 of this statement he slated that he has got 5 sons. All of them are married. He stated that his life style is of a family which belongs to an upper middle class. His elder sons looks after the Oil mill. The younger one is in the judicial service. The third son by the name of Narendra Kumar is having a shop where spare parts are sold. Another son by the name of Ashok Kumar has a medical store at Agra. So far as Veerendra Kumar is concerned, he is unemployed. According to the landlord, accommodation available with him consists of 6 rooms. He stated that his daughters-in-law want to stay separate. A categoric statement has been made that there is no other accommodation available with him in the city of Morena. Another accommodation which is there in Jiwaji ganj, Morena. This is being used as a store. Sometime back it was occupied by one person by the name of Pandit Ramcharah. He was engaged in the business so astrology and palmistry. He had since vacated the premises. 4. So far as the accommodation with the tenant is concerned, it consists of 2 rooms and one varandah. Bathroom is shared by him with the landlord. Sometime back it was occupied by one person by the name of Pandit Ramcharah. He was engaged in the business so astrology and palmistry. He had since vacated the premises. 4. So far as the accommodation with the tenant is concerned, it consists of 2 rooms and one varandah. Bathroom is shared by him with the landlord. 5. The tenant put in appearance. He stated that the description of the accommodation has not been given correctly. According to him, the accommodation consists of about 13 rooms. He further stated that two of the sons of landlord are staying at Agra along with their families. So far as the son who is in the judicial service is concerned, he is not posted at Morena. The two daughters are married. It was on these premises, it was sought to be pleaded that the need of the landlord is not bona fide. It was also sought to be brought on the record that the accommodation located at Jiwajiganj vacant and is sufficient to meet the requirement of landlord. During the pendency of this second appeal, an application was filed in this regard. This is under Order XLI Rule 27 of the Code of Civil Procedure 1908. It was stated that another accommodation with Ravindra Kumar had become vacant. This consist of one open varandah and a room. This has open space also. It was accordingly pleaded that if this accommodation which was earlier with the Ravindra Kumar is taken note of then the need of the landlord would be duly met. 6. So far as the application preferred under Order XLI Rule 27 of the Code of Civil Procedure, is concerned, it is admitted that this accommodation has become available. It is further stated that this became available when a judgment and decree was passed under Sec. 12 (1) (f) of the Act. This decree was confirmed by this Court in second appeal No. 1205 of 1995, decided on 12.9.1995. The submission made is that this accommodation being non-residential cannot be taken note of for meeting the need for residential accommodation. This assertion on the part of the landlord seems to be correct. When bonafide need vis-a-vis residential accommodation is under consideration, then availability of non-residential accommodation would have no relevancy. The submission made is that this accommodation being non-residential cannot be taken note of for meeting the need for residential accommodation. This assertion on the part of the landlord seems to be correct. When bonafide need vis-a-vis residential accommodation is under consideration, then availability of non-residential accommodation would have no relevancy. Therefore, the averment made in the application preferred under order XLI Rule 27 of the Code even if taken as correct would not come to the rescue of the appellant. 7. So far as the accommodation at Jiwajiganj is concerned, the assertion of the landlord is that these arc again being used for non-residential purposes. The photographs of this accommodation has been placed on the record by the appellant-tenant. A perusal of these photographs would indicate that this accommodation is incomplete. There are steel rolling shutters fitted in the building. Some of openings meant for settlers are closed with bricks. The presence of steel shutter indicates that the premises are to be used for non-residential purposes. The photographs placed on the record when taken into consideration lead to the conclusion that the nature of the construction in Jiwajiganj is not residential in nature. As such, the statement of landlord that to the above accommodation is being used for non-residential purposes deserves to be accepted. 8. The question which is still require to be gone into is as to whether the accommodation which is there with the landlord is sufficient to meet his needs. Evidence on the record suggests that only one son is carrying on his business at Agra. One son who is in judicial service is also not staying at Morena. Even it it be presumed that two sons are staying at Agra and one son is having his job commitments outside the city of Morena, the fact remains that the landlord is staying with his two other sons at Morena. As per the landlord, the accommodation consists of 6 rooms only. As per the tenant, this consists of 13 rooms. It has come on the record that there are common bathrooms and store one which are shared by the plaintiff and tenant, 1 am of the opinion that even if it be presumed that there are only two sons staying at Morena even then the need of the landlord would be there to have additional accommodation. It has come on the record that there are common bathrooms and store one which are shared by the plaintiff and tenant, 1 am of the opinion that even if it be presumed that there are only two sons staying at Morena even then the need of the landlord would be there to have additional accommodation. There is nothing on the record to indicate as to whether the two sons who are staying at Morena have any other family members. The appellant was present in Court. On information elicited from him he stated that there two sons have no child of their own but he informed the Court that three children have been adopted by one of these two sons. There are children of other sons also staying in Morena. 9. In the fact of the above factual reality, there would be 9 persons staying in the accommodation. The accommodation is of 6 rooms. This would definitely be deficient. Even if the accommodation as projected by the tenant is taken into consideration even then it would be deficient. One fact which needs to be stressed and which cannot be ignored, is that growing children insist for having separate accommodation for themselves. Taking into consideration all these factors, I am of the opinion that even if it is presumed that three of the sons are not staying at Morena, even then the accommodation which is available with the landlord and his two sons is not sufficient as the landlord does require additional accommodation. 10. The legal position is as under :- In Mattu Lal v. Radhey Lal 1974 RCR 441, it was pointed out that mere desire on the part of the landlord is not enough but there should be an element of need and the landlord must show that he genuinely required the accommodation. When the need can be said to be only a desire and when it is genuinely required, can not be tested on the criteria of the absolute necessity. The meaning of bona fide requirement was considered in S.N. Datta v. VIIth Additional District Judge, Allahabad and others, 1984 (1) ARC 113 as follows:- Mere desire or absolute need or necessity are both It has been held erroneous approaches in this behalf, vide Janki Pd. v. IInd Additional District Judge and others, 1980 (U.P.) RCC 602. The meaning of bona fide requirement was considered in S.N. Datta v. VIIth Additional District Judge, Allahabad and others, 1984 (1) ARC 113 as follows:- Mere desire or absolute need or necessity are both It has been held erroneous approaches in this behalf, vide Janki Pd. v. IInd Additional District Judge and others, 1980 (U.P.) RCC 602. The word 'bona fide' means genuinely, sincerely, i.e. in good lath in contradiction to mala tide. A Full Bench of this Court construed this to mean to genuinely or 'in good faith' and conveying an idea of absence of any in tent to deceive, vide Chandra Kumar San v. District Judge Varanasi. 1976 RCR 274: AIR 1976 All. 328 : 1977 ARC 142 (FB). It will not be bona fide requirement of the landlord if release is sought for an ulterior purpose or fanciful whim, vide Dr. Sita Ram Gandhi v. District Judge, Meerut and others. 1978 (2) All India RCJ 326; Smt. Kamla Ahuja v. VIIth Additional District and others, 1981 ARC 371. 11. It has also come on the record that the three sons who are slaying outside the city of Morena and also the two daughters who arc married keep on visiting the parents at Morena. A statement to this effect has been made in para 2 of the statement. One cannot ignore the Indian traditions, Merely because the daughter get married, it cannot be said that the cords of affection gel snapps. Daughter and sons keep on visiting the parents whenever they vist. they require accommodation. 12. Such was the view expressed in, Hrgun Dass v. Shri Rewa Chand, 1986 (1) RCR 147, the common knowledge that in Hindu Society married daughters keep on visiting their father's house off and on not only on social functions but even otherwise was taken note of. It was held the the cords of affection in the family are not suddenly snapped on a daughter getting married on a son being away from their parents to eke out his livelihood. The need for additional accommodation on that court cannot be said to be unreal or malafide. 13. See: also Mahendra Biharilal Hajela v. Professor Dayal Krishana Saxena. 1996 (2) RCR 279. The need for additional accommodation on that court cannot be said to be unreal or malafide. 13. See: also Mahendra Biharilal Hajela v. Professor Dayal Krishana Saxena. 1996 (2) RCR 279. This Court para 17 was observed :- The consideration, in my view, should be whether or not accommodation available with the landlord is sufficient enough to accommodation his married daughters and for that purpose any other of his family members and also other relations Jiving elsewhere who are normally expected to visit and stay with him according to customs and traditions of Indian Society. If accommodation already available with such landlord is in sufficient even for temporarily accommodating them, I do not find any reason as to why, this should not be relevant consideration to judge the requirement of the landlord. 14. As such, the Court below has not erred in passing a decree of eviction. This appeal is found to be without merit and is dismissed. Six months time is granted to file appellant to vacate the premises. This is subject to the condition that the tenant would deposit upto date arrears and also give an under taking within six weeks that he would vacate the premises, and hand over vacant possession to the landlord. There would be no order as to Costs.