JUDGMENT :

1. The present writ petition has been filed by the petitioner-defendant under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India with the following prayers:-

“i. The impugned order dated 19-08-2019 (Annex.8), passed by the court of Senior Civil Judge, Sangriya District Hanumangarh in Civil Case No.12/1996 (Sant Lal & Ors. V/s Ashok Kumar and Anr.) may kindly be declared illegal and quashed and be set aside, and the petitioners rights to defend the case may kindly be restored.

ii. That the application filed by the petitioner under Order 11 Rule 1 of CPC (Annexure-5) may kindly be allowed as prayed for.

iii. Any other order or direction which this Hon’ble Court deems just and proper may kindly be passed in favour of the petitioner.

iv. Cost of the writ petition may kindly be awarded to the petitioner.”

2. The facts apropos are that one Shri Sant Lal filed a suit for eviction of the petitioner-defendant and respondent No.2 to which written statement was submitted by the petitioner-defendant along with respondent No.2. During the pendency of the suit, Shri Sant Lal expired and his legal representatives (respondents Nos.1/1 to 1/9) stepped into the shoes of Shri Sant Lal and continued the lis.

3. During the pendency of the suit, an application for determination of provisional rent was filed by the respondents-defendants on 22.10.1996, which came to be decided on 14.03.2018 (Annex.3) and the learned Senior Civil Judge, Sangariya (hereinafter referred to as ‘the learned trial Court’) passed the following order:-

^^------ ,slh lwjr es oknhx.k ds 'kiFk i=ksa ds vk/kkj ij oknxzLr ifjlj dk fdjk;k varfje :i ls 500@& :i;s fu/kkZfjr fd;k tkuk equkflc gSA fygktk ;g U;k;ky; oknxzLr ifjlj dk fdjk;k 500@& izfrekg r; djus ds ckn okn nk;j djus dh frfFk 12-02-1996 ls iwoZ rhu o"kksZa dk cdk;k fdjk;s dh x.kuk djrs gq, 500@& :i;s izfrekg dh nj ls bl izdkj fdjk;s dk ewY;kadu fd;k tkrk gS%&
1- cdk;k fdjk;k fnukad 12-02-1996 ls iwoZ rhu o"kksZa dk cdk;k 36 ekg dk fdjk;k & 36 xq.kk 500 ¾ 18000@& :i;s fu/kkZfjr fd;k tkrk gSA
2- rRi'pkr ekg ekpZ 1996 ls Qjojh 2018 rd dqy 22 o"kksZa vFkkZr 264 eghuksa dk fdjk;k 132000@& :i;s]
bl izdkj dqy 150000@& :i;s fdjk;k jkf'k curh gSA
blds vfrfjDr mDr fdjk;s dh jkf'k ftl rkjh[k dks lans; Fkh] mlls vo/kkj.k dh frfFk rd 6 izfr'kr izfro"kZ dh nj ls C;kt izkIr djus dk Hkw&Lokeh /kkjk 13¼3½ jkt0 ifjlj fdjk;k ,oa csn[kyh fu;a=.k vf/kfu;e 1950 ds vuqlkj vf/kdkjh gksxkA
;fn izfroknhx.k us mDr cdk;k fdjk;k isVs dksbZ jkf'k oknhx.k dks vnk dj nh xbZ gS vFkok U;k;ky; esa tek djokbZ xb rks mDr fdjk;s jkf'k esa ls lek;ksftr dh tkos rFkk cdk;k fdjk;k jkf'k izfroknhx.k 15 fnu esa U;k;ky; esa tek djkosa rFkk Hkfo"; esa izfrekg dk fdjk;k 500@& :i;s izfrekg ds fglkc ls mRrjiwohZ eghus dh 15 rkjh[k rd vnk djsA**

Thus, the petitioner-defendant was to pay the defaulting rent to the respondents-plaintiffs, which was calculated to the tune of Rs.1,50,000/- within a period of 15 days along with interest @ 6% per annum from the date of institution of suit till the date of the order, i.e. 14.03.2018, in compliance of which the petitioner-defendant paid an amount of Rs.1,40,000/- on 23.03.2018 and the rest amount (remaining amount of Rs.10,000/-along with interest) was agreed to be paid after the proper calculation of the interest payable is done. Thereafter, with a malafide intention and in order to create further cause of action against the petitioner-defendant, the respondents-plaintiffs denied to accept the rent and moved an application under Section 13(5) of the Rajasthan Premises (Control of Rent and Eviction) Act, 1950 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act of 1950’) on 05.04.2019 (Annex.4) stating therein that the petitioner-defendant had denied from paying the rent and prayed for striking-off the defense of the petitioner-defendant.

4. On receiving the said application, the petitioner-defendant moved an application under Order 11 Rule 1 CPC dated 10.05.2019 (Annex.5) with a prayer to furnish him the account number of the respondents-pl