LODHA, J.—This revision application by the defendant-tenant raises an in-eresting question though a short one. The question is whether a tenant who having btained benefit under sec. 13A of the Rajasthan Premises (Control of Rent and viction) Act, 1950 (hereinafter referred to as the Act) again makes a default in the ayment of rent for six months is liable to have his defence against eviction struck out nder sec. 13(6) of the Act on account of his failure to deposit or pay any amount eferred to in sub sec. (4) or sub-sec. (5) ? It arises in the following circumstances :—

2. The defendant-petitioner took the suit shop on rent from the plaintiff-non-etitioner on 1-12-1953 on a monthly rent of Rs. 25/-. The plaintiff filed a suit for jectment on the ground of default in payment of rent. During the pendency of the uit sec. 13-A was introduced and in accordance with sec. 13-A the tenant paid the ent, interest and costs with the result that the suit for ejectment was dismissed on 4.7.1966. Thereafter the plaintiff brought a second suit for ejectment on 4-7-1968 inter alia on the ground that the defendant had again committed default in payment of rent for the period commencing from 18-1966

Click Here to Read the rest of this document