NANDLAL Vs. MOHAMMED SADIQ

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS is a defendant tenant's second appeal in a suit for arrears of rent and eviction and raises certain important questions of law.

(2.) THE material facts are these. It is admitted that the defendant took the plaintiff's house on rent by means of a rent-note Ex. P. 1 dated the 26th May, 1956, by which it was stipulated that he would pay a rent of Rs. 25/- per mensem plus a further sum of Rs. 1/4/-as house tax. THE plaintiff's case was that the defendant had defaulted in the payment of rent and house tax from the 1st July, 1958, to the 30th June, 1959. amounting in all to Rs. 315/5/- and further that he also required the suit premises for his reasonable and bonafide personal occupation, and, therefore, he gave two notices to the defendant asking him to vacate the premises in question, but without any result. He consequently instituted the present suit for recovery of arrears of rent and ejectment in the court of the Munsiff, Jaipur City, on the 8th July, 1959.

(3.) NOW, so far as the first point is concerned, I desire to point out, with all respect that I am not so much concerned with the actual conclusion at which the learned Judge arrived in the case before him and that case can be authority only for the principle which it propounded. And confining myself to that principle only, it may be permissible to point out that Bhargava J. was inclined to the opinion that sub-sec. (4) would apply only where the suit for eviction is instituted on the ground of default alone, and I would leave this point at that.