Allowed

Abdul Wahid v. Abdul Gaffar

Rajasthan HC3 Nov 2017CW/4090/2017

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court allowed the writ petition and directed the Rent Tribunal, Jaipur Metropolitan, to decide the pending eviction application filed by the petitioner landlord against the respondent tenant expeditiously within 18 months, ensuring adherence to the statutory provisions regarding time limits and adjournments under the Rent Control Act, 2001.

What did the court decide?

The Rent Tribunal Jaipur Metropolitan was directed to decide the eviction application within 18 months from the date of receipt of the certified copy of the order and to dispose of frivolous applicati

Abdul Wahid Vs Abdul Gaffar — Landlord and Tenant | Rajasthan HC (2017)

¶1

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR

¶2

S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 4090 / 2017

¶3

Abdul Wahid Son of Late Shri Abdul Karim, by Caste Musalman, Aged About 59 Years, House No. 937, Suwa Teli Ki Gali, Bagru Walon Ka Rasta, Chandpole Bazar, Jaipur (Raj.)

¶4

----Petitioner

¶5

Versus

¶6

Abdul Gaffar Son of Shri Suleman, by Caste Musalman, House No. 1009, Mahatma Gandhi Colony, Panchmukhi Hanuman Mandir, Nahari Ka Naka, Shastri Nagar, Jaipur (Raj.)

¶7

----Respondent

¶8

For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Yunus Khan.

¶9

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ALOK SHARMA

¶10

Order

¶11

03/11/2017

¶12

This petition has been filed with the prayer to direct the Rent Tribunal Jaipur Metropolitan, Jaipur to decide the eviction application No.847/2015, Abdul Wahid Vs. Abdul Gaffar filed under the provisions of Rent Control Act, 2001 (hereinafter `2001 Act') at an early date.

¶13

Counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner applicant-landlord filed eviction application under Section 9 of the 2001 Act on 20-11-2015. After service, counsel for the non applicant appeared and filed reply on 1-2-2016. Thereafter the case is still pending. Counsel submitted that Section 15(5) of the 2001 Act provides for disposal of eviction application within 240 days from service of notice on opposite party. Reference has been made to Section 21(4) of the 2001 Act which provides that adjournment by the Rent Tribunal can be granted only on an

¶14

(2 of 2)

¶15

[CW-4090/2017]

¶16

application in writing therefor decided by a reasoned order. Yet adjournments are granted on the mere askance. And the nonapplicant-tenant resorts to frivolous applications to stall the progress in the eviction petition.

¶17

Having heard learned counsel for the petitioner, and perused the material available on record as also the provisions of the 2001 Act, I find that the prayer sought for is reasonable. The Rent Tribunal is directed to expeditiously decide the application filed by the petitioner and in any event not later than eighteen (18) months from the date of receipt of the certified copy of this order. In the process, the provisions of Section 21(4) of the 2001 Act be adhered to. It is further directed that in the event of filing of frivolous application the same be decided on the same day or the following day by a reasoned and speaking order, and when necessary cost be also imposed as a measure of regulation of court proceedings.

¶18

The writ petition stands allowed accordingly.

¶19

(ALOK SHARMA) J.

¶20

Himanshu/25.

Abdul Wahid v. Abdul Gaffar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Abdul Wahid v. Abdul Gaffar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Ramesh Chand Sharma and Ors. Vs Smt Madhvi Ahluwalia and Ors.

M/S Ramratan Ghanshyam Vs State Pub Health and Engg Dept Anr.

Bharat Singh Vs Sovaran Singh Varun and Anr.

Prem Prakash Vs Jitendra and Ors.

Bhagwati Devi Vs State of Raj and Ors.

Smt Rekha Devi Vs Sharwan Lal Saini andANR