1987 Supreme(Raj) 418

RAJASTHAN HIGH COURT
J.S.Verma, Mrs.Mohini Kapoor, JJ.
Yogendra Sharma - Appellant
Versus
Narain Dass and others - Respondent
D.B. Civil Second Appeal No. 42 of 1986.
Decided On : 13-01-1987

In a suit for eviction based on the sole ground of default, the ground for eviction under Section 13(1)(a) of the Rajasthan Premises (Control of Rent and Eviction) Act, 1950, becomes non-existent as soon as the amount due and determined is deposited by the tenant. No further trial on the ground of default is contemplated.

Headnote:

EVICTION SUIT - DEFAULT IN PAYMENT OF RENT - DEPOSIT OF RENT UNDER SECTION 13(3) OF THE RAJASTHAN PREMISES (CONTROL OF RENT AND EVICTION) ACT, 1950 - CONTINUATION OF DEPOSIT OF RENT MONTH BY MONTH - NECESSITY - INTERPRETATION OF SECTION 13(3) AND 13(4) OF THE ACT.

Fact of the Case:

A suit for eviction was filed on the ground of default in payment of rent. The tenant deposited the rent determined under Section 13(3) of the Act but failed to deposit the rent month by month as provided in the second part of Section 13(4) of the Act. The tenant's defense against eviction was struck out, and a decree for eviction was passed. The tenant filed a second appeal challenging the decree.

Finding of the Court:

The Court held that in a suit for eviction based on the sole ground of default, the ground for eviction under Section 13(1)(a) becomes non-existent as soon as the amount due and determined is deposited by the tenant. No further trial on the ground of default is contemplated. The Court further held that in a suit for eviction on the ground of default alone, different situations may arise. In some cases, the suit may come to an end upon deposit of rent determined under Section 13(3), while in other cases, the suit may continue for the determination of other disputed matters. In the latter case, the tenant is required to continue depositing rent month by month as provided by the second part of Section 13(4) of the Act till the disposal of the suit.

Issues: 1. Whether in a suit for eviction on the sole ground of default as contemplated under Section 13(1)(a) of the Rajasthan Premises (Control of Rent and Eviction) Act, 1950, if the tenant deposits the amount determined by the Court under sub-section (3) of Section 13 of the Act within time, is it necessary for the tenant thereafter to continue to deposit monthly rent till the disposal of the suit? 2. Whether in a suit if the tenant deposits the amount determined under Section 13(3) of the Act under the earlier part of the sub-section (4) of Section 13 of the Act the ground of eviction under Section 13(1)(a) ceases to exist and the suit cannot be proceeded further ?

Ratio Decidendi: The Court interpreted Sections 13(3) and 13(4) of the Rajasthan Premises (Control of Rent and Eviction) Act, 1950, and held that: 1. In a suit for eviction based on the sole ground of default, the ground for eviction under Section 13(1)(a) becomes non-existent as soon as the amount due and determined is deposited by the tenant. No further trial on the ground of default is contemplated. 2. In a suit for eviction on the ground of default alone, different situations may arise. In some cases, the suit may come to an end upon deposit of rent determined under Section 13(3), while in other cases, the suit may continue for the determination of other disputed matters. In the latter case, the tenant is required to continue depositing rent month by month as provided by the second part of Section 13(4) of the Act till the disposal of the suit.

Final Decision: The Court answered the questions referred to it as follows: 1. In a suit for eviction, where the sole basis for eviction is default in payment of rent and there is no dispute about any matter so as to say that the Court has to keep the suit pending in order to decide any other point in issue, then the judgment on basis of admission may be passed as is provided under Order 12 Rule 6 CPC upon deposit of rent as determined under Section 13(3); but in a case where the matters in dispute do not come to an end upon deposit of rent determined under Section 13(3), but there are other matters which remain to be decided, then the suit has to proceed and such a suit continues to be a suit for eviction as well as for arrears of rent and is not converted in a suit for rent only. 2. The suit for eviction on the sole ground under Section 13(1)(a) does not cease to be a suit for eviction on deposit of rent determined under Section 13(3) and deposit under the first part of Section 13(4) of the Act. The suit has to be disposed finally if no point of dispute remains to be decided between the parties. If the suit has to proceed further for purposes of determination of some controversy between the parties, then the suit continues to be suit for eviction under Section 13(1)(a) of the Act and all the provisions of Section 13(3) and 13(8) are applicable to the proceedings.