S.K. MAL LODHA, J. — These are two revision petitions by the defendant directed against the order of Munsif City Jodhpur dated January 20, 1978 by which he has ordered that the pleas taken in paras Nos. 2 and 3 of the additional written statement put in by the defendant in answer to the amended plaint be ignored. The question involved in both the revisions is common. I, therefore, propose to decide them by a common judgment.

2. I may state the facts leading to S.B. Civil Revision Petition No. 92 of 1978. The plaintiff non-petitioner instituted a suit for arrears of rent and ejectment against the defendant -petitioner in the court of Munsif City, Jodhpur on May 18,1976. It: has stated in para 8 of the plaint that the defendant petitioner had paid rent up to Posh Sudi Poonam, Samvat 2024. The suit was brought for the recovery of the rent and damages for use and occupation in respect of 36 months. It was also stated that if the defendant petitioner wants to take benefit of the provisions of the Rajasthan Premises (Control of Rent and Eviction) Act, (No. XVII oil 950), he should deposit the entire rent. The defendant petitioner contested the suit on various grounds vide written statemen

Click Here to Read the rest of this document