BHARGAVA
Vishwanath Singh – Appellant
Versus
Gopil – Respondent
2. Non-petitioner is the landlord. The monthly rent of the shop is Rs. 14/-excluding electricity and other charges. Prior to the institution of the present suit on 22nd January, 1947, two more suits were filed by the landlord for rent and eviction. The first suit was dismissed because no notice to terminate the tenancy was served upon the tenant. In the second suit the tenant deposited all the arrears of rent etc. in compliance of the provisions of section 13A of the Rajasthan Premises (Control of Rent and Eviction) Act 1950 (hereinafter called the Act) which had come into force during the pendency of those proceedings.
3. The present suit for eviction is based on the grounds mentioned in sec. 13 (1) (a), (c) (d) and (f) of the Act. It is alleged that the tenant had made default in payment of rent from 16-5-1966 to 2-1-1967. 14th February, 1967 was the date for settlement of issues and the summonses upon the defendants were served, upon their refusal, by affixing it on their house. On 23rd March, 1967, defendant Vishwanath Singh was represented
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.