DHANNALAL Vs. LAXMI NARAIN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS is a revision under sec. 26 of the Rajasthan Revenue Courts (Procedure & Jurisdiction) Act, 1951, against an appellate order of the Divisional Commissioner, Kotah, dated 20-6-54, reversing the concurrent judgments of the trial court and the first appellate court in a suit relating to recovery of arrears of rent.

(2.) PUT briefly the facts of the case are that the opposite party brought a suit against the applicant, Dhannalal and two others, Jai Kishen and Kesra for recovery of Rs. 212/-as arrears of rent for Svt. 2008 with the allegations that Dhanna was admitted to tenancy of the land in dispute in 2007 on an annual rent of Rs. 100/-, that for Svt. 2008 the plaintiff desired enhancement in the rent which was refused by Dhannalal, that thereupon the tenancy was put to auction where in the other two defendants Jai Kishen and Kesra offered Rs. 312/-,that Dhanna did not join the auction proceedings and refused to vacate the land, but subsequently agreed to pay what was offered by others. Dhanna denied the claim in toto and pleaded that he never agreed to pay Rs. 312/- as rent. Jai Kishen and Kesra admitted having offered Rs. 312/- but denied their liability in the suit on the ground that possession was never transferred to them. The trial court came to the conclusion that the plaintiff failed to prove the contract upon which he relied. He, therefore, dismissed the suit but directed that Dhanna shall bear his own cost, whereas Jai Kishen and Kesra will get their costs from the plaintiff. The plaintiff went up in first appeal. In second appeal, the learned Divisional Commissioner held that the contract alleged by the plaintiff was proved clearly in the case and that the award of vexatious or compensatory costs was unjustifiable. He, therefore, set aside the decrees of the lower courts and decreed the suit. Hence this revision.