REEZJU BHAI Vs. SETHANI UMRAO KANWAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This civil second appeal under Sec. 100 Code of Civil Procedure under Order 41 Rule 1 & 2 Code of Civil Procedure has been preferred against the judgment and decree dated 18.7.2001 passed by the learned Additional District Judge No. 1, Ajmer in Civil Appeal No. 58/94 affirming the judgment and decree dated 25.2.1994 passed by the learned Munsif (West) city, Ajmer in COS No. 4/91 whereby the suit of the plaintiff respondent for arrears of rent and eviction has been decreed.

(2.) The plaintiff respondent instituted a suit for arrears of rent and eviction against appellant in the court of Munsif, Ajmer city on 1.1.1991 on the ground of second default in payment of rent with the averments that a house No. 7/341 was let-out by him to the appellant on a monthly rent of Rs. 27.50 plus Rs. 2.50 House Tax and that he has not paid the rent of the said premises w.e.f. 1.1.1988 to 31.12.1990 and thus a sum of Rs. 1,080.00,has become due against him which has neither been paid nor tendered to him and thus has committed default in the payment of rent. It was also pleaded that a suit on the same ground of default with regard to same premises was also field by him being COS No. 182/85 which was decided by the learned Addl. Munsif, Ajmer on 24.7.1985 holding that the defendant had committed default in payment of rent, but giving him the benefit of first default under section 13(6) of the Rajasthan Premises (Control of Rent & Eviction) Act, 1950 (here-in-after referred to as 'the Act'), the suit was dismissed. Thereafter, the defendant has committed second default in payment of rent. He, therefore, prayed for a decree of eviction on the ground of default in payment of rent and for recovery of the arrears of rent. The suit was contested by the defendant by filling written statement and denying that he has committed default in payment of rent. He pleaded that the rent was deposited by him under section 19 CC of the Act in advance and, therefore, prayed for the dismissal of the suit. On the pleadings of the parties, four issues were framed and after taking oral and documentary evidence of the parties and after affording opportunity of hearing, the suit was decreed on 25.2.1994 which judgment and decree was affirmed by the learned first appellate court vide impugned judgment and decree dated 18.7.2001.

(3.) Both the courts below have recorded concurrent finding of fact that the rent has not been legally deposited as pleaded.