KARAM CHAND Vs. LALLU RAM

JUDGEMENT

(1.) MUNSIF, Tonk, by his decree dated 5th Apr. , '76 decreed Civil Original Suit No. 321 of 1972, filed by landlords Karam Chand and Deva Lai against Lallu Ram respondent No. 1. Ejectment of tenant Lallu Ram was claimed on grounds of defaults and reasonable and bonafide personal necessity of the demised house. The MUNSIF found that the suit house was reasonably and bonafide required by the landlords for their own use.

(2.) LALLU Ram tenant filed Civil First Appeal No. 55/76 in the court of District Judge, Tonk. In view of the amendment made in the Rajasthan Premises (Control of Rent and Eviction) Act, 1950 amending section 14 (2) of the said Act, which provides that decree for ejectment on ground of personal necessity will not be passed against the tenant if comparatively there will be greater hardship to the tenant in passing the decree for ejectment rather from withholding it, the District Judge, Tonk, by his judgment dated 20. 4. 78, set aside the decree of Munsif, Tonk and remanded the suit for fresh decision with the directions that the Munsif will frame an additional issue with respect to the point covered by S. 14 (2) of the Act and after giving the parties reasonable opportunity of adducing evidence, decide the case afresh. It is against this remand order that Karam Chand co-landlord has filed this second appeal.

(3.) THE learned counsel for the tenant also referred to the decision in Anand Prakash vs. Abdul Kayoom With regard to this decision, it may be stated that it was a second appeal and the learned Single Judge did not remand the case to the trial court and remanded it to the Addl. District Judge, who had heard the first appeal and had directed the Addl. District Judge to give opportunity to the parties to lead evidence on the sole question covered by S. 14 (2) of the Act and then to decide the first appeal. In this case also, the question was not examined whether the entire case should have been remanded or only an issue should have been remitted for findings to the first appellate court.