RATAN SINGH Vs. JASRAJ

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS is a second appeal against the judgment and decree of District Judge, Jodhpur, dated the 28th April, 1951.

(2.) THE facts giving rise to it are that the appellant's father Paney Singh filed a suit for the electric charges, arrears of rent and ejectment from two shops against the respondent in the court of the Joint Kotwal No. 2 of the former Jodhpur State. During the pendency of the suit, Paney Singh died and the appellant as his son and legal heir came in his place. On the 20th of March, 1945, his suit was decreed by the said court. That decree was executed and the respondent was ejected from the shops on 26th April, 1946. THEreafter on 27th August, 1946, the respondent filed an application under sec. 12 of the Marwar Rent Control Order 1944. It was alleged that the appellant had obtained the decree for ejectment on the ground that the shops were required for his personal use but he did not occupy them himself within a month of the respondent's eviction. On the other hand, he learned them out others within the period of six months from the date of eviction and therefore it was prayed that the respondent be put back in possession of the shops and that the appellant be also ordered to him compensation. After this application was filed, the court of the Joint Kotwal No. 2 was abolished and the case was therefore tried by the City Munsiff, Jodhpur. THE application was dismissed by him on 11th May, 1950. THE respondent went in appeal to the District Judge, Jodhpur. He allowed the appeal, reversed the decree dated 20th March, 1945 and ordered that the possession of the shops be restored to the respondent within one month and that the appellant should also pay Rs. 50/- as damages to the respondent, in addition to the costs. It is against this judgment and decree that the present appeal has been filed.

(3.) THE appeal is therefore allowed, the judgment and decree of the first appellate court is set aside and the decision of the Munsiff restored. In other words the application under sec. 12 of the Act stands dismissed. THE appellant will receive his costs throughout. .