NANDLAL Vs. ABDUL HAMID

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Appellant-defendant-tenant has preferred this second appeal under Sec. 100 CPC, challenging the decree for eviction passed in respect of his rented shop on the ground of bonafide and reasonable necessity by the Court of Additional District Judge No.4, Sikar in first appeal No.24/2015 vide judgment dtd. 2/2/2019 and resultantly, the judgment and decree dtd. 13/3/2015 passed in civil suit No.65/2002 by the Court of Additional Senior Civil Judge, Sikar dismissing plaintiff's suit for eviction, has been set aside.

(2.) Heard counsel for appellant at length and perused the record.

(3.) In the instant case, it is not in dispute that shop in question situated at Mochiwada Raod, Sikar is in tenancy of appellant- defendant since 1960. Respondents-plaintiffs purchased the suit shop through registered sale deed dtd. 21/8/2002 along with whole property wherein shop in question is situated, from its owner and landlord of appellant namely Kishan Lal. Appellant- defendant does not dispute that the transfer of his tenanted shop to respondent-plaintiff through registered sale deed dtd. 21/8/2002 and attorn respondent-plaintiff as his landlord and continue to pay the rent to him. After purchasing the property, the respondent-plaintiff instituted civil suit after eviction, invoking provisions of Sec. 13 of the Rajasthan Premises (Control of Rent and Eviction) Act, 1950 (hereinafter "the Act of 1950"). The suit was instituted seeking eviction on the ground of default, bona fide and reasonable necessity of the rented shop but plaintiff for his own business and material alteration also claimed for fixation of standard rent in respect of rented shop.