- (1.) THIS revision petition is directed against the order of the learned Additional Munsif and Judicial Magistrate (East), Ajmer, dated, 11. 8. 89, in the case relating to eviction of a tenant on the ground of default and other grounds under the provisions of Rajasthan Premises (Control of Rent and Eviction) Act, 1950 (hereinafter to be called 'the Act' ).
(2.) IN order to elucidate the controversy it is necessary to narrate some facts. Plaintiff-non-petitioners instituted a suit against the defendant petitioner on the ground of sub letting and substantial damages. During the pendency of the suit and before the amendment of the suit present petitioner tenant submitted a suit against the present plaintiff for the fixation of the standard rent. After the institution of the suit by the present petitioner under section-6 of the Act of 1950, present non-petitioners landlord amended the suit and added one ground that the defendant has committed default in the payment of rent as such, he should be evicted on this ground also. Court below was asked to determine the rent under section 13 (3) of the Act of 1950. Trial Court determined that the tenant is liable to pay rent at the rate of Rs. 145/- per month under section 13 (3 ). However, the final determination of the liability of the tenant is still to be made.
(3.) MR. Lodha appearing on behalf of the petitioner-tenant, submitted that the trial court had no jurisdiction to determine the rent under clause (3) of Section-13. He submits that Section-7 over- rides the provisions of Section-13 Clause (3), of the Act. The second limb of the argument of Mr. Lodha is that initially, the suit was for the eviction on the ground of substantial damages and sub letting, as such, the provisions of Clause (3) of Section-13 cannot be invoked. Mr. Karnani appearing on behalf of the non-petitioners-plaintiff submitted that the provisions of Clause (3) of Section 13 are independent of the provisions of Section 7 of the Act of 1950. He further submits that under clause (3), the last paid amount is to be determined as a provisional rent, whereas, under section 7 it is not necessary that the last paid amount should be determined. Mr. Karnani further submitted that subsequent amendment of the default ground in the suit will not take away the suit from the purview of clause (3) of Section 13. ;