- (1.) Heard, Mr. M.C. Bhandari, learned counsel for the appellant and Mr. R.L. Maheshwari, learned counsel for the respondents.
(2.) Defendant Roshanlal, who has been unsuccessful in both the Courts below, has filed this second appeal against the judgment and decree dated February 28, 1980 of the learned Additional Civil Judge, Udaipur. The plaintiff-respondent No. 1 (Ganesh Lal) instituted a suit for ejectment against the defendant-appellant, Roshanlal and defendant-respondents 2 and 3 (Mohanlal and Shankarlal respectively) to whom, according to the plaintiff, the shop in question was sublet. The plaintiff sought ejectment on three grounds : (1) That the shop in question is required by him reasonably and bonafide in other words, he based his suit on the ground covered by Section 13(1)(h) of the Rajasthan Premises (Control of Rent and Eviction) Act, (No. XVII of 1950) for short 'the Act' hereafter); (2) That the defendant has committed default in payment of rent and has, therefore, rendered himself liable to eviction under Section 13(1)(a) of the Act; (3) That the defendant has sub-let the shop in question to defendant Nos. 2 and 3 without permission of the landlord and, therefore, the plaintiff is entitled to evict him under Section 13(1)(e) of the Act.
(3.) The learned Munsif by his judgment dated January 31, 1975 decreed the suit for ejectment. On appeal, the learned Additional Civil Judge confirmed the decree.;