KAMAL SHARMA Vs. JETHI BAI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This is defendant's second appeal under Section 100 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (in short 'CPC') challenging the impugned judgment and decree dated 13/08/2013 passed by Second Additional District Judge, Rajnandgaon in Civil Appeal No. 68-A/2012, affirming the judgment and decree dated 23/08/2012 passed by First Civil Judge, Class-II, Rajnandgaon in Civil Suit No. 09-A/2011. Brief facts necessary for adjudication of this appeal are as under:

(2.) Mr. Sanjay Shyam Agrawal, learned counsel appearing for the defendant/tenant would submit that both the Courts below has fallen into error by granting a decree under Section 12(1)(a) and 12(1)(e) of the Act of 1961, as dispute with regard to the rent as per provisions prescribed under sub-section (2) of Section 13 of the Act of 1961, was not decided by the two Court below particularly by the trial Court and consequently, the defence under Section 13(6) of the Act of 1961 could not have struck out by the trial Court. Mr. Agrawal would further submit that the need of grandson-Trigun Sadani does not come within the purview of family member, as defined in Section 2(e) of the Act of 1961, and would finally submit that granting of decree under 12(1) (a) and 12(1) (e) of Act of 1961, and order dated 15/07/2011 striking out defence under Section 13(6) of the Act of 1961, without deciding the dispute with regard to the rate of rent, is illegal and submits that following two substantial questions of law arise for determination:

(3.) I have heard learned counsel appearing for the appellant/defendant and have perused the judgment and decree of both the Courts below.