The appellant landlord brought an application to evict the respondent tenant from the premises on the ground of default in payment of rent for a long period companymencing from 16 11 1965 in spite of the two decrees for recovery of rent having been passed earlier.
The tenant did number, at any time, deny the numberpayment of rent from 16 11 1965 number did the tenant assert the deposit of rent before any authority as an alternative plea to the denial of appellants title.
Admittedly, there was a clear averment in the plaint by the appellant of number payment of any rent by the respondent tenant since 16 11 1965 despite two decrees for recovery of rent having been passed, earlier against him.
The trial Court accepted the appellants landlords claim and passed an order of eviction which was affirmed in first appeal.
The respondent tenants only plea in defence was a denial of the companytract of tenancy or in other words, the relationship of landlord and tenant between the parties.
This gives rise to the present appeal.
Leave granted.
