PARAS MAL Vs. SHIV LAL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS Second Appeal arises out of a suit for eviction which has been decreed by the two courts below. Plaintiff-Defendant No. l has filed a suit on the grounds that he has let out a shop situated at Bhilwara to defendant-respondent No. 2. , Ladu Ram on rent @ Rs. 65/- p. m. on 24th Jan. 1973, evidencing which a rent-note was executed by Ladu Ram on 11. 7. 1973. Ladu Ram has defaulted in paying rent since Feb. 1974 and that he also parted with possession of the suit shop to appellant-defendant without plaintiff's consent and therefore, he is entitled to a decree for eviction.

(2.) DEFENDANTS took the plea that in fact Parasmal appellant was only inducted as a tenant and Ladu Ram was not the tenant. It is the case of defendants that Ladu Ram had executed rent-note dt. 11. 7. 1973 only as a surety for Parasmal and not as a tenant of plaintiff Shiv Lal. Execution of Rent Note by Ladu Ram in favour of Shiv Lal is not in dispute and it is also not in dispute that said rent-note does not show that Ladu Ram is surety and not a tenant.

(3.) HAVING considered rival contentions and taking into consideration the material placed before me, I am of the opinion that there are no grounds to interfere with the concurrent findings of the fact recorded by the two courts below which can give rise to any substantial question of law for entertaining this Second Appeal.