(1.) THE instant appeal has been preferred against the judgment and decree passed by the First Appellate Court dated 10. 5. 02 by which it has affirmed the judgment and decree of the trial court dated 25. 8. 99 by which the suit of the respondents for eviction of the appellant on the ground of bonafide need under the provisions of Rajasthan Premises (Control of Rent and Eviction Act), 1950 has been allowed.
(2.) THE main contention of the appellant before the court below as well as before the First Appellant Court had been that on the ground of bonafide need an earlier suit had been filed which was dismissed in default under Order 9 Rule 8 of the Civil Procedure Code (hereinafter called `the Code' ). Respondents' application for restoration of the same under Order 9 Rule of the Code also stood dismissed by the Court. THErefore, the suit was barred by the provisions of Order 9 Rule 9 of the Code Moreso, the principle of res judicta was also attracted.
(3.) IN Ram Gobinda Daw & Ors. vs. Smt. H. Bhakta Bala Dassi etc. (4), the Hon'ble Supreme Court held that where the suit had been dismissed in default by the Court or for want of jurisdiction, the earlier order does not operate as res-judicata.