MOHAMAD HANIF Vs. KALYAN MAL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE defendant-petitioner has filed this revision against the order dated 29.9.95 passed by the learned Distt. Judge No. 3, Jodhpur by which he dismissed the appeal of the petitioner and upheld the order of the trial court dated 11.8.95 by which the defence of the petitioner-defendant against default was struck out.

(2.) THE petitioner is a defendant tenant against whom the non-petitioner- plaintiff filed a suit for eviction and arrears of rent. The court in that suit determined the rent under Sub-section (3) of Section 13 of the Rajasthan Premises (Control of Rent and Eviction) Act on 21.7.92. Thereafter, the plaintiff moved an application under sub-section (5) of Section 13 of the Act alleging that the defendant-petitioner has committed several defaults in payment of rent in pursuance of the order passed by this Court on 21.7.92. He, therefore, prayed that the defence of the defendant be struck out against eviction. The plaintiff filed a detailed chart showing the defaults committed by the defendant-petitioner. The learned trial Court has given details of the defaults committed by the defendant in payment of rent at page 2 of its order. The defendant petitioner submitted that sine the tenancy was in accordance with the Gregorian calendar, the plaintiff deposited rent in accordance with the above. The learned trial court held that the defendant- petitioner committed defaults and the defendant could not produce any evidence to the contrary. According to the trial court, the defendant committed not less than 22 defaults. He, therefore, allowed the application and ordered that the defence of the defendant-petitioner be struck out against the eviction in terms of Sub-section (5) of Section 13 of the Act.

(3.) I have heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the non-petitioner.