RAGHUNATH SINGH Vs. VIKRAM SHARMA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) AS far as the dispute between the parties in this particular case is concerned it has been settled out of the court and no adjudication in favour of either of the parties is to be made. However, the point which has been referred to this larger Bench requires an answer to set at rest the controversy as to which view taken by the different Benches is correct as it arises quite often before the appellate courts. The point to be decided is whether the provisions of sections 13(3), 13(4) and 13(5) of the Rajasthan Premises (Control of Rent and Eviction) Act, 1950 (hereinafter to be referred to as the Act) apply to the appeals as well or they are applicable only to the suits pending before the trial court.

(2.) SECTION 13(i) of the Act enumerates all the grounds on which the landlord would be entitled to evict a tenant and the circumstances under which the court can pass decree for eviction. If the tenant is ready and willing to pay the rent to the full extent allowable by the Act, no decree for eviction would be passed. But the ground of default would be available to the landlord if the tenant has neither paid nor tendered the amount of rent due to him for six months. Further protection is available to the tenant when the suit is on the ground of default in payment of rent. This further protection contained in section 13(3) onwards of the Act reads as under :

(3.) THE question to be decided is whether the tenant has to deposit the monthly rent as provided in section 13(4) of the Act month by month subsequent to the period for which the determination has been made only during the pendency of the suit or during the pendency of the appeal also and in case he fails to deposit this amount during the pendency of appeal can his defence against eviction be struck out. The existing decisions of this court on this subject may be looked into before coming to the decisions of the other High Courts and the Supreme Court.