KANHAIYA LAL Vs. BHAWAN DAS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard learned counsel for the parties.

(2.) According to learned counsel for the appellant, the trial court decreed the suit of the plaintiff for eviction of the defendant on the ground of default and personal bonafide necessity, however, in the trial court, the rent was not determined under Section 13A of the Rajasthan Premises (Control of Rent and Eviction) Act, 1950 (for short 'the Act of 1950'). The tenant/respondent preferred an appeal to challenge the judgment and decree of the trial court. Said appeal was allowed only on the ground that the trial court did not determine the rent.

(3.) According to learned counsel for the appellant, the determination of rent is required only for the purpose of giving benefit of first default to the tenant. The determination of rent has nothing to do with respect to the findings recorded on any of the issues including even the finding on the question of default for the period prior to filing of the suit. The determination of the rent under Section 13(3) of the Act of 1950 gives benefit to the tenant of paying rent of default period along with interest so that he may avoid decree for his eviction from the suit premises on the ground of committing first default in payment of rent of six months or more. By this provision, the tenant is entitled to claim benefit on condition that he shall pay the monthly rent to the landlord in time as provided under Section 13(4) of the Act of 1950 and in case, the tenant fails to deposit the determined arrears of rent and/or rent during the pendency of the suit, then his defence is liable to be struck off. The scheme of Sub- Sections (3) to (6) of Section 13 of the Act of 1950 clearly reveals that the determination of rent or nondetermination of rent cannot affect the merit of the case so far as any of the issues are concerned.