SURESH Vs. GOVIND NARAYAN RAJORIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The appeal under Sec. 96 CPC filed by the appellants/defendants (for short 'the defendants') against the judgment and decree dtd. 2/1/2017 passed by Additional District and Sessions Judge, Dausa, District Dausa, Rajasthan in Civil Suit No. 20/2001 (47/2008) whereby the suit filed by the respondent/plaintiff (for short 'the plaintiff') for eviction and recovery of rent has been decreed.

(2.) Brief facts of the appeal are that plaintiff filed a suit for eviction and recovery of rent against the defendants alleging that on 1/6/1993 defendant No. 1 took the disputed shop on rent from plaintiff for five years, rent of which was fixed at Rs.1,000.00 per month. Defendant No. 1 did not vacate the suit shop on 1/6/1998. Thus, rent of the shop was enhanced to Rs.3,000.00 per month. The said rent was paid till May 1999. After that, the defendant No. 1 promised to vacate the disputed suit property till the year 2000 but after May 1999, he did not pay the rent and sublet the disputed shop to the defendant No. 2 in May 1999. Plaintiff required the suit property for bona fide necessity of his son.

(3.) After service of summons, defendants did not appear before the trial court and trial court decreed the suit ex-parte against them on 7/3/2003. Defendants separately filed an applications for setting aside the ex-parte decree. The trial court set aside the ex-parte decree against the defendant No. 2 but dismissed the application of defendant No. 1. Defendant No. 1 filed a review application. The said application was also dismissed. After that, defendant No. 1 filed a S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 5501/2010 titled Suresh v. Govindnarayan. The said petition was also dismissed. Defendant No. 1 also filed a Civil Misc. Appeal but said appeal was also dismissed. The ex-parte decree passed against him attained finality.