Disposed

Suman Swami v. State and Anr.

Rajasthan HC23 Nov 2021CW/4096/2016

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Rajasthan directed the respondents to constitute a committee for fresh adjudication of lease rights and rent determination. The court ordered the petitioners to submit representations within 15 days and the respondents to decide within three months, declaring the earlier 2008 rent resolution non-prejudicial to the new assessment.

What did the court decide?

Respondents directed to constitute a committee within three months to determine rent and lease rights; petitioners to submit representations within 15 days.

Suman Swami Vs State and Anr. — Landlord and Tenant | Rajasthan HC (2021)

¶1

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR

¶2

S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 7109/2016
Panna Lal Tanwar S/o. Shri Jerevan Mal, aged about 40 years,
resident of Chhabili Ghati Ki Niche, Tehsil and Disrict Bikaner.
----Petitioner
Versus
1. The State of Rajasthan through Secretary, Department of
Local Bodies, Secretariat, Jaipur.
2. The Urban Improvement Trust through its Secretary, Bikaner.
----Respondents
Connected With
S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 2982/2016
Satyanarayan Swami
----Petitioner
Versus
State And Anr
----Respondent
S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 2983/2016
Badrinarayan
----Petitioner
Versus
State And Anr
----Respondent
S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 2990/2016
Pramod Kumar
----Petitioner
Versus
State And Ors
----Respondent
S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 3622/2016
Savitri Devi
----Petitioner
Versus
State And Ors

(2 of 5)

[CW-7109/2016]

----Respondent

S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 3623/2016

¶7

Shiv Singh Rajpurohit

----Petitioner

Versus

State And Ors

----Respondent

S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 4096/2016

¶13

Suman Swami State And Anr Chhotu Khan State And Anr

¶14

----Petitioner Versus ----Respondent S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 4097/2016 ----Petitioner Versus ----Respondent S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 4099/2016

¶15

Om Singh State And Anr

¶16

----Petitioner Versus ----Respondent S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 5406/2016

Amar Chand And Anr

----Petitioner

Versus

State And Anr

----Respondent

S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 6797/2016 Manohari Devi And Ors

----Petitioner

(3 of 5)

[CW-7109/2016]

Versus

State And Anr

----Respondent

S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 8652/2016

Saroj

----Petitioner

Versus

State And Anr

----Respondent

S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 9447/2016

Krishan Gopal

----Petitioner

Versus

State And Ors

	----Respondent
For Petitioner(s)	: Mr. Muktesh Maheshwari & Mr. Aidan Ram Choudhary
For Respondent(s)	: Mr. JL Purohit, Sr. Advocate assisted byMr. Rajeev Purohit

¶41

HON'BLE DR. JUSTICE PUSHPENDRA SINGH BHATI

¶42

Order

¶43

23/11/2021

¶44

Counsel for the petitioner(s) submits that lease-deeds were executed in favour of petitioners or the persons through whom they have acquired right of the shops in 1980 for a monthly rent of Rs.100/-.

¶45

Counsel for the petitioner makes a limited submission that the respondents redetermined rent vide its Resolution No.8 dated 26.06.2008 and rent Rs.100/- per month was escalated to Rs. 5,000/- per month.

¶46

(4 of 5) [CW-7109/2016]

¶47

Counsel for the petitioner further submits that first notice

¶48

for escalation of rent was given to them in 2011.

¶49

Counsel for the petitioner submits that their right to get the lease extended/determination of rent/continuity of possession/purpose of possession all needs to looked into by the UIT strictly in accordance with law afresh.

¶50

On such limited submission, counsel for the respondent assures the Court that if fresh representations are brought in by the petitioners, the same shall be looked into by UIT, Bikaner after constituting appropriate Committee for the same. Counsel for the respondent UIT further assures the Court that detailed opportunity of hearing shall be given to the petitioners and appropriate rent/ lease/continuance/ possession/ purpose of possession and all other rights shall be duly considered, as raised petitioner(s) in their representation.

¶51

This Court while disposing of writ petitions directs that fresh adjudication of all rights shall be made by the respondents in accordance with the assurance given by counsel for the respondents before the Court. If any kind of re-determination of rent is made, the same shall be applicable and the present order shall not prejudice determination of the same.

¶52

The petitioners shall give appropriate representation taking up their cause including determination of rent within a period of 15 days from today.

¶53

The respondents in turn shall be required to decide their representation by constituting appropriate Committee in that regard within a period of three months from today.

¶54

(5 of 5) [CW-7109/2016]

¶55

The rent decided by the Committee shall be payable from the

¶56

year 2007. Any previous determination made by the respondents in its resolution dated 26.06.2008 shall not prejudice fresh determination. The rent so determined shall be paid thereafter within a period of six months by the petitioners.

¶57

If the representation is not preferred by petitioner in fifteen days and the findings of Committee are not abided by the petitioner(s), then the respondents shall be free to move against the petitioners in accordance with law.

¶58

It is needless to say that the petitioners shall be at liberty to take appropriate legal recourse.

¶59

(DR.PUSHPENDRA SINGH BHATI),J.

¶60

102-114 nirmala/Sanjay-

Suman Swami v. State and Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Suman Swami v. State and Anr.

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

Navin Bhansali and Ors. Vs B.O.R.,Raj. Ajmer and Ors.

Chotu Lal Giri Vs Union of India

Lrs of Smt. Devi Vs Lrs of Narpat Chand and Ors.

Kishan Lal Soni Vs Shri Nagrik Shiksha Samiti

Smt. Marudhar Kanwar Vs State and Ors.

Smt. Sharda Kanwar Vs State and Ors.