Honble JAIN, J.–Heard learned counsel for the parties.

(2). Briefly stated the facts of the case are that plaintiff- appellant Nirmal Kumar Dugar filed a suit for eviction and recovery of arrears of rent in respect of rented premise, against defendant-respondent Bhanwar Lal alias Bhonri Lal on the grounds of default in making the payment of monthly rent and denial of title. During the pendency of the suit, the sole defendant Bhanwar Lal died and his legal heir i.e. his son Narendra Kumar Saini was substituted in his place. A notice of the application under Order 22 Rule 4 CPC was served upon the legal representative of deceased defendant but legal representative did not appear in spite of service of summon, therefore, ex-parte order was passed against him in the case. The plaintiff examined PW-1 Nirmal Kumar and PW-2 J.P. Saxena. The trial court recorded a finding that the defendant committed default in making the payment of rent but he is entitled to get the benefit of first default under sub-section (6) of Section 13 of the Rajasthan Premises (Control of Rent and Eviction) Act, 1950, (for short, the Act of 1950) therefore, no decree of eviction can be passed on the ground of defau

Click Here to Read the rest of this document