BHOOP SINGH AND OTHERS Vs. SMT. PARWATI DEVI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This is a defendants second appeal against whom the lower appellate court passed a decree for ejectment from the house in question of which they were the tenants. The trial court had refused the decree for ejectment of the appellants.

(2.) The respondent, who was plaintiff in the suit, purchased the property on March 25, 1968. The appellants were tenants of the property from before that date. The case of the plaintiff, which was accepted by both the courts below, was that the appellants had knowledge of the transfer of the property in favour of the plaintiff from at or about the time of the transfer. The appellants, according to the plaintiff, defaulted in payment of rent and failed to pay the full amount within a month of the service upon them of a composite notice of demand and the one under Sec. 106 of the Transfer of Property Act. The period for which rent was demanded from the appellants was between March 25, 1968 and April 30, 1970. They tendered a sum of Rs. 249/-through two money orders in which they mentioned that they were tendering the amount of rent due till May-34, 1970. The amount so tendered was, however, refused by the plaintiff. The case that the plaintiff took in this regard in court was that it did not represent the amount due to her for the entire period between March 25, 1968 and May 31, 1970.

(3.) The trial court, as noticed above, did not pass a decree in favour of the plaintiff for the ejectment of the appellants from the premises in dispute. It took the view that in the circumstances of the case the appellants could not be said to have committed any default in the matter of payment of arrears. The plaintiff, however, succeeded in persuading the lower appellate court that the appellants did commit default in payment of the arrears as they did not tender the full amount due to the plaintiff for the period between March 25, 1968 and May 31, 1970, but tendered an amount which fell short of it. It is the decree for ejectment from the premises in suit that is being assailed by the defendants in the present second appeal.