Honble YADAV, J.–The tenant-defendant-appellant has filed the present second appeal against the judgment and decree dated 28.1.1986 passed by learned Additional Civil Judge No.4, Jodhpur whereby he affirmed the judgment and decree of eviction dated 8.9.1982 passed by Additional Munsiff Magistrate No.2, Jodhpur. The learned trial court has decreed the suit for eviction on the ground that the ten-ant has parted with the possession of the premises in dispute to his mother and his brothers wife within the meaning of clause (e) of sub-sec. (1) of Section 13 of the Rajasthan Premises (Control of Rent and Eviction) Act, 1950 (hereinafter referred to as Act No. 17 of 1950).

(2). For effective disposal of the present appeal I consider it expedient to refer certain factual aspects of the matter in brief which are borne out from perusal of the record.

(3). The land lord-plaintiff-respondent Shri Jaidev instituted the suit against the tenant defendant-appellant on 6.9.1976 alleging that he is the owner of plot No. 569 situated at 11th `C Road, Sardarpura, Jodhpur which he gave on rent to tenant defendant-appellant Shri Hardev for carrying on business of coal and wool Tal at the monthly rent of Rs. 25/-. The terms of the tenancy have been agreed as given on the back of the rent receipt. It is alleged in the plaint that the tenant-defendant-appellant, after closing his business of coal and wool Tal given the premises to his mother and his brothers wife, who are carrying on business of coal and wood Tal. Thus the tenant-defendant-appellant has parted with the possession of the premises in question. It is averred in the plaint that after closing his business of coal and wood Tal, the tenant-defendant-appellant is carrying on another business of scoo-ter repairs under the name and style of M/s. Kishore Auto Repairs at 12th `B Road, Sardarpura, Jodhpur. In view of the fact that the tenant defendant-appellant has now started another business of scooter repairs it is alleged in the plaint that the premises in question is not required by him for his business of coal and wood Tal.

(4). After service of summons on the tenant defendant-appellant he filed his written statement denying the averments made in the plaint. The tenant-defendant-appellant in his written statement denied to have taken on rent the disputed premises on monthly rent of Rs. 25/-instead it was stated that the premises in dispute was initially let out to him at monthly rent of Rs. 20/-. It is further denied by the tenant-defendant that he is not carrying on his business on the disputed premises and that he has parted with the possession of the premises taken by him on rent. It is averred in the written statement by the tenant-defendant-appellant that as a matter of fact in his absence the business of coal and wood Tal is being looked after by his father, mother, brother, brothers wife and his wife as they are the members of a Joint Hindu Family. It is also denied in the written statement that he ceased to be in possession of the suit premises and that his mother and brothers wife are in exclusive possession of the premises. It was averred in the written statement that he himself is in possession of the suit premises and carrying on his business of coal and wood Tal. The tenant-defendant-appellant denied the fact of his being owner of M/s. Kishore Auto Repair Works, Jodhpur. It is clearly stated in the written statement that Shri Rana Ram is the Proprietor of M/s. Kishore Auto Repair Works, Jodhpur which is situated in the near vicinity of the tenant-defendant-appellants coal and wood Tal shop. As and when the tenant defendant-appellant has no business he used to go to the shop of Rana Ram and in case of need he helps him in carrying out his work of repairs of scooters as he knows some repair work. It is categorically denied in the written statement that the tenant-defendant-appellant does not need the suit premises for his business.

(5). It is borne out from the record that after filin

Click Here to Read the rest of this document