1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR. ::: JUDGMENT Balu Lal. vs. Ram Sewak. S.B.CIVIL SECOND APPEAL NO.482/2005 UNDER SECTION 100 CPC AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND DECREE DATED 29.10.2005 PASSED BY SHRI R.M. CHATURVEDI, ADDITIONAL DISTRICT JUDGE NO.1, BHILWARA IN CIVIL APPEAL NO.56/2005. DATE OF JUDGMENT ::: 11.5.2007 PRESENT HON'BLE MR. PRAKASH TATIA, J. Mr.M Shishodia, for the appellant. Mr.Durga Ram for Mr.Sajjan Singh, for the respondent. - - - - - BY THE COURT: Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the alleged partnership deed on the basis of which the appellant/tenant submits that he has not sublet the suit property but he entered into the partnership with 2 two more partners because of financial constraints. As per the partnership deed, the appellant shall have no right to get the firm dissolved and he shall have no right to operate the bank account. He shall also have no right in any of the property. The appellant did not invest a single penny for entering into the partnership. In that facts and circumstances, if the two courts below, after considering the said partnership deed, did found that the transaction of the partnership deed is a sham transaction and in fact, the appellant has sublet the property, then that finding is based on appreciation of evidence as well as proper consideration of document. In view of the above, I do not find any substantial question of law involved in this appeal. Accordingly, this second appeal deserves to be dismissed. At this juncture, learned counsel for the appellant prayed that sufficient time may be given to the appellant to vacate the suit premises. Learned counsel for the respondent has serious objection to the grant of time to the appellant. I considered this prayer of learned counsel for 3 the appellant and looking to the facts of the case, this Court is of the view that the appellant be granted time upto 31.5.2008 to vacate the suit premises. Therefore, it is ordered that in case, the appellant furnishes a written undertaking before the trial court within a period of two months from today that he shall hand over the vacant possession to the landlord by or before 31.5.2008 and shall not part with the possession or sublet the suit premises during this period and shall pay all the arrears of rent and decreetal amount, if due, and shall also pay the rent upto 31.5.2008 in advance within a period of two months from today before the trial court or directly to the landlord, the decree under challenge shall not be executed till 1.6.2008. In case of non-compliance of the order or default in payment of amount mentioned above, the decree shall become executable forthwith. With the aforesaid concession, this appeal is dismissed. (PRAKASH TATIA), J. S.Phophaliya