Dismissed

Maqbool S/O Shri Subhan v. Muzaffar Ahmad S/O Zafar Ahmad

Rajasthan HC3 Jul 2019CW/6578/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

High Court disposed of a writ petition challenging orders by Rent Tribunals requiring a tenant to vacate a shop. The court declined to interfere with the lower courts' findings but granted the petitioner nine months to vacate the property instead of immediate eviction.

What did the court decide?

petitioner granted nine months time to vacate the shop and handover possession on or before 31/03/2020.

Maqbool S/O Shri Subhan Vs Muzaffar Ahmad S/O Zafar… — Landlord and Tenant | Rajasthan HC (2019)

¶1

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR

¶2

S.B. Civil(Misc.) Writ Petition No. 657812019

¶3

Maqbool S/o Shri Subhan, Aged About 65 Years, Muslim Leelgar R/o Ward No. 03 Mohalla Naykan Jhunjhunu Tehsil And Distt. Jhunjhunu (Raj.)

¶4

Versus

¶5

Muzaffar Ahmad S/o Zafar Ahmad, Aged About 62 Years, Muslim Peerzada R/o Mohalla -Peerz'adan, Noor Manzil Jhunjhunu Tehsil LW4 And Distt. Jhunjhunu.

¶6

-.---Respondent

¶7

For Petikip'ner(s) : Mr. Ajatshatru Mina For Respondent(s) : Mr. J.R. Chaudhary

¶8

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK KUMAR GAUR

¶9

b ~~rdei-b

¶10

03/07/2019

¶11

¶12

The instant writ. petitiog has been filed by the petitioner i tenant challenging the orders dated 23.08.2018 and 15.02.2019 passed by the Rent Tribunal, Jhunjhunu and the Appellate Rent Tribunal, Jhunjhunu, respectively.

¶13

Counsel for the petitioner-tenant submitted that the findings in respect of bonafide necessity of the respondent-owner are perverse. Counsel further submitted that there is already an agreement to purchase the property in question between the petitioner and respondent and in view thereof the petitioner is retaining the property as owner.

¶14

Counsel appearing for the respondent has submitted that the findings recorded by both the courts below may not be interferred and both the courts below after appreciating the entire'

¶15

[CW-6578/2019]

¶16

(2 0f.2)

¶17

evidence came to conclusion that the shop in question is required to be vacated by the petitioner-tenant.

¶18

The learned counsel for the petitioner-tenant submitted that if this court declines to interfere with the orders of the courts below, at least one year time may be granted to the petitionertenant to vacate the shop in question.

¶19

Mr. J.R. Chaudhary, counsel for respondent submitted that the shop in question has been let out to the petitioner-tenant s. * ?tfl since 1991 and o.rders of the courts below require vacation of the shop with immediate effect.

¶20

I have considered submissions made by counsel for both the parties. i

¶21

This court does not find any ground to interfere in the findings recorded by the co,u,& bel,ow. Hbwever, considering the : P * ". ';$ % fact that the shop in question is required to be vacated by the petitioner and returned back to the respondent, this court grants nine months' time to the petitioner-ten.ant to vacate the shop and the petitioner-tenant w.ill handover the possession of the shop to the respondent on or before 31,03.2020. It is also made clear that C ; the petitioner-tenant is also liable to pay the rent every month regularly, till the vacation of the shop.

¶22

With the above modification in the order passed by the Appellate Rent Tribunal, the present writ petition stands disposed of.

¶23

(ASHOK KUMAR GAUR),J

Maqbool S/O Shri Subhan v. Muzaffar Ahmad S/O Zafar Ahmad

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Maqbool S/O Shri Subhan v. Muzaffar Ahmad S/O Zafar Ahmad

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Chotu and Ors. Vs Devki Nandan Jaju and Ors.

Raj Medical Services Corporation and Ors. Vs Ms Bal Pharma Ltd.

Raj Medical Services Corporation and Ors. Vs Ms Bal Pharma Ltd.

Babu Lal Meena Vs Shri Deepak Upreti and Ors.

Mahendra Gargieya S/O Late Shri G.D. Gargieya Vs Icici Bank Limited

Shri Satyanarayan Garg S/O Late Shri Ganeshmal Agrwal Vs Shri Omprakash Agrwal S/O Late Shri Madan Lal