GYAN CHAND Vs. KUNJBEHARILAL AND 3 ORS.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This is a second appeal by one of the three defendants, namely, Gyanchand in a suit for eviction and arrears of rent.

(2.) The relevant facts giving rise to this appeal are like this : There is a shop in Jaipur City Tripolia Bazar, Jully described into para No. 1 of the plaint. It belongs to the plaintiffs. This shop was let out to the appellant and his two brothers Padamchand and Tarachand on 1-9-61 at a monthly rent of 60.00. The plaintiffs served a notice of eviction under Sec. 106 of the Transfer of Property Act on the three tenants terminating their tenancy. The tenants did not vacate the suit premises. The plaintiff respondents therefore instituted a suit in the Court of the Munsif East, Jaipur City. They chaimed eviction of the three defendant tenants on three grounds-(1) that the defendant-tenants neither paid nor tendered rent for more than six month from Magh Sukhlal, Sat, 2021, (2) that the shop was required by the plaintiffs for their own use and occupation bona fide and reasonably and (3) that tea shop was sub let to Messers. Rajasthan Barren Bhandar without obtaining any consent from the plaintiffs. On the aforesaid grounds, it was prayed that the defendant tenants Padamchand, Tarachand and Gyanchand be evicted from the shop and a decree be paused for arrears of rent and damages to the tune of Rs. 510.00.

(3.) The summons on all the three defendants were served for the hearing dated 14-2-66. Mr. Tarachand Advocate put in his appearance on behalf of the tenants Padamchand and Tarachand. Gyanchand appellant did not put in his appearance on that date though he was duly served. On the same date that is, 14-2-66 Mr. Tarachand moved an application under Sec. 13 of the Rajasthan Prem see (Control of Rent and Eviction) Act, 1950, her in-after referred to as the Act, for determination of the rent due from the defend-ants in accordance with law. The court determined be rent on 1.8.61 and directed the defendants to deposit a sum of Rs. 398 76 P. on or before 19-4-66. The plaintiffs moved an application for striking out the defence of the defend-ants against eviction as they failed to deposit or pay monthly rent regularly as specified in Sec. 13(4) of Act. On 14.12.68 the trial court disposed of that application and ordered as under: