RAJ KUMAR Vs. ARJUNLAL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) HEARD learned counsel for the parties on application submitted by the appellant-applicant for seeking clarification of the other dated 9th Nov. , 2001.

(2.) THE brief facts of the case are that a suit for eviction was filed by the plaintiff-respondent-non-applicant against the appellant-applicant-defendant with the allegation that the suit property was let out to the defendant on a rent of Rs. 2,701/- per month. THE plaintiff claimed the arrears of rent of 18 months amounting to Rs. 48,618/-, but since the defendant-tenant already gave a deposit of Rs. 20,000/- to the plaintiff, therefore, the suit for recovery of arrears of rent was for Rs. 28,658/ -. According to plaintiff, the tenancy was terminated by the plaintiff from 19. 03. 1996. THErefore, the plaintiff claimed damages for use and occupation @ Rs. 5,000/- per month.

(3.) IN the backdrop of these facts, the appellant-tenant submitted a revision petition being S. B. Civil Revision Petition No. 128/2004 and challenged the order of the executing court dated 16th Dec. , 2003 by which the petitioner-appellant's objection petition was dismissed by the executing court and appellant-defendant-tenant submitted an application for clarification in the order dated 9th Nov. , 2001 passed in S. B. Civil First Appeal No. 297/2001, which has been registered as S. B. Civil Misc. Application No. 15/2004.