The petitioner-landlord challenged the Rent Tribunal order permitting delayed written statements by tenants in eviction suits. The court dismissed the petitions but directed the Tribunal to expedite the proceedings.
Writ petitions dismissed with a direction to the Rent Tribunal to expedite disposal of the eviction petitions.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR
S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 11192/2019
Mahendra Singh S/o Late Sh. Tejraj Singh, Aged About 89 Years, Resident Of House No. 22, Sardarpura, 2Nd B Road, Jodhpur.
----Petitioner
Versus
----Respondents
S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 11298/2019
Mahendra Singh S/o Late Tejraj Singh, Aged About 89 Years, House No.22, Sardarpura, 2Nd B Road, Jodhpur.
----Petitioner
Versus
Tulsi Ram S/o Moti Ram Ji, Parihar Sabji Bandhar And Provision Store, Shop No.4, Tejraj Bhawan, Outside Siwanchi Gate, Jodhpur.
----Respondent
S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 11305/2019
Mahendra Singh S/o Late Tejraj Singh, Aged About 89 Years, House No.22, Sardarpura, 2Nd B Road, Jodhpur.
----Petitioner
Versus
Kailash S/o Late Kalyan Mal, Prem Vilas Provision And General Store, Shop No.1, Tejraj Bhawan, Outside Siwanchi Gate, Jodhpur.
----Respondent
For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Shridhar Mehta
(2 of 3)
[CW-11192/2019]
JUSTICE DINESH MEHTA
Order
26/07/2019
By way of the present writ petitions, the petitioner has laid challenge to the order dated 15.04.2019, whereby the Rent Tribunal, Jodhpur Metropolitan has taken written statement of the respondents-tenants on record.
Mr. Shridhar Mehta, learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the present petitioner-landlord has filed three eviction petitions, wherein the tenants have not filed written statements, for which their right to file written statement had been closed.
After more than 1½ years, in all the three cases, the tenants moved separate applications with almost identical averments that the tenant/his mother was ill, for which the written statements could not be filed.
Challenging the order dated 15.04.2019 (in all the three writ petitions), Mr. Mehta contended that the tenants have intentionally not filed the written statements in time and have thereafter moved an application under Section 21 of the Rent control Act, simply with a view to pass time, in which attempt they have been successful, inasmuch as the Tribunal below has allowed the tenants’ applications and taken their written statement on record, albeit with the cost of Rs.6,000/-.
Having heard learned counsel for the petitioner and upon perusal of material available on record, this Court does not find these cases to be fit, for exercising supervisory jurisdiction conferred upon this Court by Article 227 of the Constitution of India. Though the tenants seem to have unnecessarily protracted
(3 of 3)
[CW-11192/2019]
the proceedings, yet since the Tribunal below has granted the tenants-respondents, an opportunity to file the written statement, this Court does not deem it expedient to upturn such an order.
The writ petitions are, therefore, dismissed, however, with a direction to the Rent Tribunal to expedite the disposal of the petitions filed by the petitioner.
(DINESH MEHTA),J
261-skm/-
2 issues framed by the court
Whether this Court should exercise its supervisory jurisdiction under Article 227 to set aside the Rent Tribunal order allowing tenants to file written statements belatedly.
Whether the writ petitions challenging the Rent Tribunal order should be allowed on the ground of delay and mala fide intent by the tenants.
2 provisions across 2 enactments
Mahendra Singh
Om Prakash
Rent Tribunal, Jodhpur
Tulsi Ram
Kailash
DINESH MEHTA
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
