ROOP CHAND GOYAL Vs. JHANWAR LAL MAROTHI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Appellant-defendant has preferred this second appeal aggrieved by impugned judgment and decree dtd. 12/10/2018 passed by Addl. District Judge No.1, Bikaner (for short, 'first appellate Court') dismissing his appeal against judgment and decree dtd. 4/2/2014, passed by Civil Judge (Junior Division), Nokha (for short, 'learned trial Court'), whereby the suit filed by respondent-plaintiff, for eviction and recovery of rent against appellant-defendant was decreed.

(2.) Brief facts, giving rise to the present appeal are that respondent-plaintiff filed a suit for eviction and recovery of rent against appellant-defendant stating that the suit property a Shop, which is situated in Sadar Bazar, Nokha, was given on rent but as the rent become due on 1st of March, 2012 was not paid till 30 th of May, 2012, respondent sent a notice under Sec. 106 read with Sec. 111(h) of the Transfer of Property Act, 1882 terminating the tenancy. The respondent-plaintiff, while claiming unpaid rent of Rs.10,000.00 from 1/7/2012, in the plaint, prayed for decree of eviction, recovery of outstanding rent, damages for use and occupation and notice expenses.

(3.) Appellant-defendant submitted his written reply stating therein that he had paid rent till February, 2012 and further submitted that remaining rent was offered to the respondent- plaintiff but he did not accept the same as such money-order of Rs.2200.00 was sent but the respondent-plaintiff refused to receive the same. It is the case of appellant-defendant that he made endeavor to deposit the amount, by sending notice on 13/7/2012 but in vain, and therefore, the notice terminating tenancy is not valid.