CHHANGANI, J—These four appeals arise out of two suits between the same parties, the earlier being a suit for mere arrears of rent and the latter being a suit for arrears of rent and ejectment in respect of the same premises and are connected with each other and deserve to be disposed of by one judgment

2. The material facts may be stated as follows:—

In the city of Jodhpur outside the Jalorigate there is a building known by the name of "Tapariya Mansion". It belonged to Shri Jai Narayan Tapariya and his family. In March 1944 a portion of this building was let out by deceased Jai Narayan to Jodhpur Commercial Bank (hereinafter referred to as the "Bank") at a monthly rent of Rs. 150 per month for a period of five years ending on 31st March, 1949. Although the initial period of the lease expired on 31st March, 1949, the Bank continued to remain in possession of the premises. Negotiations were commenced between Jai Narayan Tapariya and the authorities of the Bank for the terms of the lease after the 31st March, 1949. There was a protracted correspondence and eventually, on 28th October, 1949, Jai Narayan had a meeting with the Chairman and the General Manager of the Bank at Bombay. During that meeting the terms relating to continuance of the lease were discussed and an oral agreement was reached The main terms agreed were subsequently incorporated in a letter No. 5/ F.10 52-731 dated 29 10 49 addressed by Manager, Bombay Branch, to Jai Narayan Tapariya. They may be reproduced here:—-

"(l) Rent to be fixed @ Rs. 500/- (Rupees Five Hundred only) per month from 1st April, 1949

(2) An agreement for ten years with an option to the Bank for further five years on the same terms of rent.

(3) Fixing of steel shutters for the doors and the stair case for the cellar to be carried out when the amount of Rs. 9000 is accumulated with us by crediting sundry deposit rent account at the rate of Rs. 500 per month, being the monthly rent of our premises.

(4) You will bear half of the costs which we shall have to pay to our solicitors in respect of the lease agreement."

3. It may al|so be mentioned that after the despatch of this letter the Jodhpur Branch of the Bank opened a sundry deposit rent account and credited Rs. 500 per month in that rent account on account of the rent of the premises. Credit entries were also made in this account in respect of the amount payable by the Bank to the landlord on account of electricity and water charges. It may be mentioned at this stage that Jainarayan and his son Laxminarayan had mortgaged the entire building Tapariya Mansion with Udaibhan and Devchand and others to accrue certain loan. The mortgages having not secured the repayment of the loan, filed a suit on the basis of the mortgage deed. In that suit, Badridass, the present plaintiff, was appointed as a receiver of the property. The plaintiff, Badridass made some efforts to secure the recovery of the rent and electricity and water charges from the Bank, but having not succeeded, filed a suit (No. 36 of 1954) on 1.6.54. In this suit he prayed for a decree for a sum of Rs. 33,385. The particulars of this amount is as follows: —

1. Arrears of rent for 62 months from 1.4.49 to 31st May, 1954, Rs. 31.000 were calculated at Rs. 500 p.m.; the plaintiff gave a credit of Rs. 450 on account of the rent for three months received at the rate of Rs. 150 per month and a credit of Rs. 1,000 cash received from the Bank. The amount on account of rent was thus reduced to ... ... ... Rs. 29,550/-

2 Water charges ... ... ... Rs. 81/-

3. Electricity charges ... ... ... Rs. 1,446/-

4. Interest ... ... ... Rs. 2,308/-

Rs. 33,385/-

4. This suit was contested by the defendant-Bank. The defendant-Bank admitted having taken the lease of the premises in the year 1944 at a monthly rent of Rs 150 per month. It was also admitted that there were some negotiations for the creation of a fresh lease after 31st March, 1949. The Bank, however, did not admit that an oral agreement was reached between

Click Here to Read the rest of this document