MILAP CHANDRA, J.—the plaintiff-non-petitioner filed a suit for ejectment against the defendant-petitioner on the ground of reasonable and bonafide necessity in respect of a shop measuring 6 x 4 situated at Nagaur. The defendant resisted it. After recording the evidence of the parties, it was decreed. The defendant filed Appeal No. 8 of 1981 in the court of the Additional District Judge, Nagaur. Subsequently, an application was moved by him before the learned Additional District Judge that an issue regarding partial eviction be framed as provided in the proviso of sub-section (2) of Section 14 of the Rajasthan Premises (Control of Rent and Eviction) Act, 1950 (hereinafter to be called the Act) and be remitted to the learned trial Court for recording its finding thereon. The plaintiff seriously opposed it. After hearing the parties, the learned Additional District Judge dismissed the application by his order under revision.

2. It has been contended by the learned counsel for the defendant-petitioner that the learned Additional District Judge has failed to exercise the jurisdiction vested in him in rejecting the application, the said proviso mandates the court to consider the question

Click Here to Read the rest of this document