P.K.LOHRA,J. - (1.) Appellant-defendants have laid this second appeal under section 100 CPC to assail judgment and decree dated 16th of February, 2018, passed by Addl. District Judge No.4, Jodhpur Metropolitan (for short, 'learned first appellate Court'), whereby learned first appellate Court has affirmed the judgment and decree dated 15th of March, 2017, passed by Addl. Civil Judge and Metropolitan Magistrate No.3, Jodhpur Metropolitan (for short, 'learned trial Court'), allowing the suit of the plaintiff-respondent for arrears of rent and eviction.
(2.) Brief facts of the case are that respondent-plaintiff laid a suit for eviction and recovery of arrears of rent against appellant defendants on the ground of default in payment of rent, inter-alia, stating therein that the suit premises, Quarter No.14, Girdhari Singh Ji Ka Nohra, Near Mahatma Gandhi School, Jodhpur, was rented out to Veerbhan Singh, the ancestor of defendants, on monthly rent of Rs. 4, but he defaulted in payment of rent as such earlier also a suit was filed in the Court of Addl. Munsif Magistrate No.1, Jodhpur for eviction on the ground of default in payment of rent. The plaint further averred that Late Veerbhan Singh moved an application under Section 13(4) of the Rent Act on 11.08.1965 showing his willingness to deposit outstanding rent and expenses and the Court determining the rent disposed of the matter on 26.08.1965, however, despite taking benefit of first default, payment of rent was again discontinued, therefore, another suit for possession of suit premises and arrears of rent was filed, to which written statement was filed by original defendant denying the title of plaintiff, but later on he compromised the matter and accordingly a decree was passed on 07.02.1967. The plaintiff further pointed out in the plaint that earlier the property in question was with Receiver appointed in Civil Original Suit Nos.146/78 and 135/95, which were pending in the Court of Addl. District Judge No.3 but later on the services of Receiver came to an end on 30.10.1996 in view of judgment and decree passed in those matters and the property in question was handed over to the plaintiff on 31.12.1996, which is being looked after by the plaintiff since then. As per plaint, the rent was paid to the Receiver only upto June 1995 and thereafter neither the rent was tendered to the Receiver nor to the plaintiff after 31.12.1996, as such, the appellant-defendants have become unauthorized occupants and are liable to be evicted. With these averments the plaintiff prayed for decreeing the suit with costs.
(3.) Appellant-defendants filed written statement to the suit but as the right to defend was already closed vide order dated 29.08.2011, the same was not taken into consideration by the trial Court.;