SATYA PRAKASH Vs. MADAN LAL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This Civil Revision Petition has been preferred under Sec. 115, Code of Civil Procedure by the defendant-petitioner being aggrieved by the order dated 21-8-97 whereby the learned Addl. Civil Judge (JD) No. 1, Jodhpur dis-allowed application filed by the petitioner under the provisions of Order 14, Rule 5, read with Sec. 151, Code of Civil Procedure with a prayer to amend issue No. 1 thereby displacing the burden of proof initially laid on the defendant to prove that the rent was paid as per the provisions of law within the stipulated period and so the defendant-petitioner was not a defaulter, in Civil Original Suit No. 198/97 instituted by the plaintiff-non-petitioner on the ground of neither payment nor tendering the amount of rent due from the defendant-petitioner for more than six months.

(2.) I have heard the learned counsel for the parties and have also perused and considered the legality and regularity of the impugned order so passed by the learned trial Judge.

(3.) The plaintiff-non-petitioner brought suit on the ground of default in payment of rent as envisaged by provisions of Sec. 13(1)(a) of the Rajasthan Premises (Control of Rent and Eviction) Act, 1950 (for short 'the Act, 1950) against the defendant-petitioner inter alia pleading in para 7 of the plaint that the plaintiff was ignorant about the fact whether the defendant-tenant had deposited any rent of the tenanted premises and whether the same was deposited according to the contract of tenancy and as per the legal provisions therefor and he was also never informed about it by the defendant and so the defendant had defaulted by failing to pay rent of the suit premises beginning from June, 1992 thereby committing a default of six months or more and hence he has liable-to be evicted from the suit premises.