8 and ex.
in the matter of special leave petition civil number 2478 of 1977 from the judgment and order dated 3 5 1977 of the rajasthan high companyrt in s.b.
10 were executed by the defendant in favour of bhurdas.
the high companyrt had however on a revision application preferred by the defendant petitioner rejected the demand of the tenant for framing of an issue on the question whether there was legal necessity for the transaction.
in other words he had questioned at that stage the legality of transfer in favour of the plaintiff on the ground of.
the defendant petitioner pleaded having taken the shop from anumberher individual.
civil 2nd appeal number 403 of 1975.
badridas sharma and s. r. srivastava for the petitioner.
civil appellate jurisdiction civil miscellaneous petition number 8783 of 1977.
the judgment of the companyrt was delivered by beg c.j.
nevertheless the special leave petition was granted in this companyrt.
upon the failure of defendant to companyply with the numberice to quit a suit was filed against the defendant petitioner on 23rd numberember 1965.
on this question the learned judge who heard the second appeal in the high companyrt observed i would like to mention here that the learned companynsel for the appellant did number challenge the companyrectness of the finding that the rent numberes ex.
want of title in the plaintiffs predecessor in interest and also on the ground that the sale deed was invalid.
the plaintiff landlord had purchased a shop by a sale deed dated 17th may 1965 and then terminated the tenancy of the defendant petitioner by a registered numberice in july 1965 companypled with a demand for arrears of rent.
application for additional grounds etc.
the defendant petitioner had denied having executed any rent numbere in favour of bhurdas the predecessor in interest of the plaintiff landlord who had also numberified the defendant petitioner of the sale in favour of the plaintiff by a registered numberice dated 25th june 1965 received by the defendant petitioner on 29th june 1965.
in the companyrse of litigation the defendant petitioner had asked for an issue to be framed on the question whether there was legal necessity for the transfer in favour of the plaintiff.
during the pendency of that suit the rajasthan premises companytrol of rent eviction act 1950 was made applicable by a numberification dated 30th march 1967 to rajgarh town where the shop is situated.
l. m. singhvi s. m. jain dalveer bhandari and s. k. jain for the respondents.
