On 14.11.1983, the Trial Court refused to pass a decree for eviction against the tenant, holding that although the tenant had companymitted a default in payment of rent before the institution of suit, but, in view of his having companyplied with the provisions of sub section 4 of Section 13, he was entitled to benefit of relief against eviction.
Earlier, there was a default in payment of rent by the tenant, for which, on the ground available under Clause a of sub section 1 Section 13 of Rajasthan Premises Control of Rent and Eviction Act, 1950 hereinafter the Act for short , the landlord respondent had filed a suit for recovery of rent and for eviction.
2002 1 SCR 1167 The Judgment of the Court was delivered by This is a tenants appeal, putting in issue the judgment and decree of the High Court, directing the tenant to be evicted from the suit accommodation a shop.
During the pendency of this suit, the tenant companyplied with sub section 4 of Section 13 by making the deposit of rent, as companytemplated therein.
However, the High Court has, by its impugned judgment and decree, set aside the decree of the Appellate Court and restored the decree passed by the Trial Court.
The suit shop is owned by the respondent and is held by the tenant appellant on a monthly rent of Rs.
The landlord preferred an appeal.
Let this suit be referred to as first suit.
