GULAB Vs. DWARKADHEESH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) At the request of learned counsel for the parties, the appeal itself is finally heard though the matter was listed for orders on stay petition.

(2.) Learned counsel for the appellant submits that the first appellate court committed serious error of law in remanding the matter to the trial court after setting aside the judgment and decree of the trial court dated 3.11.2001. Brief facts of the case are that the plaintiffs/ respondents filed a suit for ejectment against the defendant/appellant. According to learned counsel for the respondent, the suit was not filed under the provisions of Rajasthan Premises (Control of Rent and Eviction) Act, 1950 and in fact, the suit was filed because in earlier suit, the parties compromised and the defendant agreed that he will vacate the suit shop and also gave an undertaking that he will vacate the premises within a period of two years.

(3.) Therefore, the present suit was filed by the plaintiffs to eject the defendant on the basis of undertaking given by him in the earlier filed suit. This fact was specifically pleaded by the plaintiffs in para no.8 of the plaint, copy of which has been shown by learned counsel for the respondents. A notice was served upon the defendant by the plaintiffs on completion of two years of undertaking. The plaintiffs also pleaded in para no.4 of the plaint that the defendant also agreed to increase the rent but he did not pay the rent from January, 1992 at the rate of Rs.375/- per month.