KISHANLAL SHARMA Vs. PREM KISHORE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This petition of revision under Section 115 C.P.C. is directed against the appellate order, dated, July 23, 1981, by the Additional District Judge, Jaipur City whereby that learned Judge affirmed the order, dated, December 12, 1980, by the trial court dismissing the petitioner's application, dated, April 11, 1980, for provisional determination of arrears of rent payable by the petitioner-tenant to the respondent-landlord, in accordance with the provisions of Section 13 (3), Rajasthan Premises (Control of Rent and Eviction) Act, 1950, as amended to date.

(2.) The facts which may be helpful in appreciating the controversy may be briefly recapitulated here. Prem Kishore, who is the respondent in this petition and who will hereinafter be referred to as the plaintiff, filed a suit against Kishanlal Sharma, the present petitioner, who will hereinafter be referred to as the defendant, for eviction from certain residential premises on the averments that the defendant is in occupation of the premises as a tenant since June, 1971, that the original landlord, Mukat Beharilal, sold the premises to the plaintiff, vide sale deed, dated, May 20, 1974, registered on June 17, 1974, that the vendor duly notified the defendant ashing him to attorn to the plaintiff and pay rent to him from May 20, 1974 onwards and that the defendant had rendered himself liable to be evicted from these premises by reason of nonpayment of rent due from him from September 1, 1974 to June 30, 1975. The plaintiff mentioned in this context that earlier he had filed a suit for eviction against the defendant in respect of the same premises on the ground of personal bona fide necessity and for recovery of arrears of rent for the period from May 20, 1974 to August 31, 1974, and that the same was still pending on July 2, 1975, when the present suit was filed.

(3.) The defendant filed his written statement on March 13, 1976, admitting that he had been inducted into the premises by Mukat Behari Lal on a rental of Rs. 50/- per mensem which was increased to Rs. 58/- per mensem with effect from February 1, 1972. He also admitted that Mukat Behari Lal had executed the sale deed, dated, May 20, 1974, in respect of these premises in favour of the plaintiff as vendee. He however described the sale as fictitious and benami which had been brought about by Mukat Beharilal so that he could obtain a decree for eviction in the name of the plaintiff on the ground of the latter's personal necessity.