Shiv Kumar Sharma, J. - (1.) This revision arises from the order dated November 4, 1996 of the learned Civil Judge (Junior Division) Bharatpur, whereby the application under Order 24 Rule 1 CPC moved by the defendant-non-petitioner for depositing the amount of rent was allowed.
(2.) Brief facts giving rise to this revision petition are that in a suit for recovery of rent and eviction on the ground of second default instituted by the plaintiff petitioner (for short the land lord) against the defendant non-petitioner (in short the tenant). Before provisional determination of rent under Section 13(3) of the Rajasthan Premises (Control of Rent and Eviction) Act, 1950 (for short the Act), the tenant moved an application under Order 24 Rule 1 CPC, praying therein to deposit the amount of rent. The learned trial court allowed the application vide the impugned order and directed the tenant to deposit the rent till October, 1996 only. It has further been observed by the trial court that the provisional determination of rent under section 13(3) of the Act shall be made independently after hearing the parties.
(3.) Mr. B.L. Mandhana, learned counsel appearing for the land lord contended that the suit for arrears of rent due from December 1, 1992 to October 31, 1994 only and it does not envisage payment for future rent from December 1, 1995 to November 30, 1996. Order 24 Rule 1 CPC does not envisage payment of such due which are not part of the claim filed, current and future rent is ordered to be paid only when eviction suit is decreed. The tenant has filed applicatioti purportedly under Order 24 Rule 1 CPC for provisional determination of rent.;