Wanchoo, C.J.—This is a revision by Hansraj against the order of the Civil Judge, Jaipur City, refusing to stay the suit brought by Gappulal and another against him.

2. The facts giving rise to this revision are briefly these. Hansraj was a tenant of Gappulal and Damodar. It is said that the landlords gave notice to Hansraj on the 16th of September, 1950, determining the tenancy. Thereafter, a suit was filed by them on the 10th of September, 1951, in the Court of the Civil Judge for recovery of damages for use and occupation for the period after the determination of the tenancy. Before this, however, the tenant, Hansraj, had filed a suit on the 4th of January, 1951, for fixation of standard rent under sec. 6 of the Rajasthan Premises (Control of Rent and Eviction) Act, 1950, hereafter called the Principal Act. As soon as the landlords filed their suit for damages for use and occupation, Hansraj applied to the Munsifs Court under sec. 7 of the Principal Act for an order of stay of proceedings in the Civil Judges Court. Thereupon, the Munsif passed an order for stay of proceedings in the Civil Judges Court under that section. When that order was received by the Civil Judge, it was urg

Click Here to Read the rest of this document