Dismissed

Tikam Chand @ Subhash S/O Jagdish Narayan v. Akhilesh Kumar S/O Radheyshyam Sharma

Rajasthan HC26 Aug 2019CW/9586/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court dismissed the writ petition challenging the Rent Tribunal's denial of interim possession in a landlord-tenant suit. The Court held the impugned order was not perverse and remanded the suit for speedy trial under the Rajasthan Rent Control Act, 2001.

What did the court decide?

The suit for possession filed before the Rent Tribunal was directed to be disposed within six months; adjournments restricted.

Tikam Chand @ Subhash S/O Jagdish Narayan Vs Akhilesh… — Landlord and Tenant | Rajasthan HC (2019)

¶1

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR

¶2

S.B. Civil Writ Petition No.9586/2019

¶3

Tikam Chand @ Subhash S/o Jagdish Narayan, Aged About 42 Years, By Caste Lakhera R/o Subhash Colony, Behind Poonam Cinema, Dausa.

¶4

----Petitioner

¶5

Versus

¶6

Akhilesh Kumar S/o Radheyshyam Sharma, Aged About 65 Years, R/o Vyas Mohalla Dausa.

¶7

Anil Kumar S/o Radheyshyam Sharma, R/o Vyas Mohalla Dausa.

¶8

----Respondents

¶9

For Petitioner(s) : Mr.Harshad Kapoor. For Respondent(s) : Mr.Subhash Sharma.

¶10

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ALOK SHARMA

¶11

Order

¶12

26/08/2019

¶13

Heard the counsel for the petitioner-tenant (hereafter

¶14

‘tenant’) and the respondents-landlords (hereafter ‘landlords’) and

¶15

perused the impugned order dated 16.5.2019 passed by the

¶16

Senior Civil Judge, Dausa cum Rent Tribunal, Dausa (hereafter ‘the

¶17

Rent Tribunal’) whereby in a suit for possession filed by the tenant

¶18

against the landlords alleging unauthorized dispossession, interim

¶19

relief of being put back in possession during the pendency of the

¶20

suit sought by the tenant has been denied.

¶21

(2 of 3)

¶22

[CW-9586/2019]

¶23

I am of the considered view that in the facts of the case

¶24

nothing perverse or illegal can be attributed to the impugned

¶25

order dated 16.5.2019. It is well settled that interim relief cannot equate with the final relief except in case of suits for perpetual/

¶26

permanent injunctions.

¶27

Consequently, I am not inclined to interfere as prayed

¶28

for in the petition. It is accordingly dismissed.

¶29

It is however made clear by way of abundant caution

¶30

that nothing in the impugned order dated 16.5.2019 will affect the

¶31

outcome of the final adjudication of the underlying suit before the

¶32

Rent Tribunal, rights agitated wherein be adjudicated on the basis of admissible evidence/s produced before it and obtaining state of

¶33

law. It is also directed that the suit for possession having been filed in the month of November, 2017, the Rent Tribunal consonant

¶34

with the provisions of the Rajasthan Rent Control Act, 2001

¶35

(hereafter ‘the Act of 2001’) which requires adjudication of all landlord-tenant disputes in a summary trial within 240 days of

¶36

service on the opposite party decide it within a period of six

¶37

months from the date of presentation of a certified copy of this

¶38

(3 of 3)

¶39

[CW-9586/2019]

¶40

order. No adjournment in the suit in issue be granted without just

¶41

cause and should, when warranted be by a reasoned order on a

¶42

proper application being filed to the satisfaction of the Rent

¶43

Tribunal. Further miscellaneous applications be decided as far as

¶44

possible within three days of filing and when found frivolous be

¶45

visited with costs. Besides the Rent Tribunal in its discretion shall be free to keep over miscellaneous applications for disposal

¶46

alongwith the final disposal of the suit itself.

¶47

(ALOK SHARMA), J

¶48

Himanshu Soni /375/214

Tikam Chand @ Subhash S/O Jagdish Narayan v. Akhilesh Kumar S/O Radheyshyam Sharma

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Tikam Chand @ Subhash S/O Jagdish Narayan v. Akhilesh Kumar S/O Radheyshyam Sharma

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

M/S Raj Breweries Ltd. Vs State of Raj and Ors.

Jai Singh Vs State of Raj and Ors.

Ranjna Poonia D/O Late Nk Dinesh Kumar Poonia Vs State of Rajasthan

M/S. Tolaram Nathmal Limited Vs Municipal Corporation

Harish Chandra Joshi Vs Subhash Chandra Joshi and Anr.

Mahaveer Prasad Maheshwari through Lrs Vs Bhagchand through Lrs