Dismissed

P.N. Baburajan S/O Shri Neelamberan Rajan v. Amarchand Goyal S/O Late Jagdishnarayan Goyal

Rajasthan HC15 Dec 2022CR/7/2020

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This civil revision petition was dismissed by the High Court Bench at Jaipur. The Court upheld the Rent Tribunal's dismissal of the petitioners' application challenging the jurisdiction, ruling that the Tribunal correctly exercised jurisdiction under the Rent Control Act. The revision was found devoid of merit.

What did the court decide?

Dismissal of the civil revision petition as being devoid of merit; Impugned order was upheld.

P.N. Baburajan S/O Shri Neelamberan Rajan Vs Amarchand… — Property and Title | Rajasthan HC (2022)

¶1

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR

¶2

S.B. Civil Revision Petition No. 7/2020

¶3

P.N. Baburajan S/o Shri Neelamberan Rajan, R/o Ward No. 7, Near Samrat Cinema, Bajaj Road, Sikar (Raj.)

¶4

Smt. Jaya Rajan, W/o Shri P.N. Baburajan, R/o Ward No. 7, Near Samrat Cinema, Bajaj Road, Sikar (Raj.)

¶5

----Petitioners/Non-Applicants

¶6

Versus

¶7

Amarchand Goyal S/o Late Jagdishnarayan Goyal, Aged About 54 Years, R/o Krishna Kirti Suraj Marg, Anand Nagar, Sikar (Raj.)

¶8

Smt. Krishna Goyal W/o Shri Amarchand Goyal, Aged About 44 Years, R/o Krishna Kirti Suraj Marg, Anand Nagar, Sikar (Raj.)

¶9

Akhil Bharti Secondary Public School, Kargil Shahid Marg, Sikar Tehsil Sikar, District Sikar (Raj.) Through President/ Secretary.

¶10

----Respondents

¶11

For Petitioner(s) For Respondent(s)

¶12

: Mr. Satish Kumar Khandal

¶13

: Ms. Arushi Goyal and Ms. Aarihanta Goyal on behalf of Ms. Parinitoo Jain

¶14

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MAHENDAR KUMAR GOYAL

¶15

Order

¶16

15/12/2022

¶17

This civil revision petition has been preferred by the petitioners/non-applicants (for brevity, ‘the petitioners’) against the order dated 05.12.2019 passed by the learned Rent Tribunal (for brevity, ‘the Tribunal’), Sikar in Rent Application No.21/2019 whereby, their application under Order 7 Rule 11 read with Section 151 CPC has been dismissed.

¶18

(2 of 3)

¶19

[CR-7/2020]

¶20

The relevant facts in brief are that the respondents No.1 & 2/applicants filed a rent application under Sections 9 & 18 of Rajasthan Rent Control Act, 2001 (for brevity, ‘the Act of 2001) against the petitioners and the respondent No.3. In this application, the petitioners filed an application under Order 7 Rule 11 read with Section 151 CPC, which has been dismissed by the learned Tribunal vide order dated 05.12.2019, impugned herein.

¶21

Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the learned Tribunal erred in dismissing their application ignoring and overlooking that it did not have jurisdiction to entertain the application filed by the respondents No.1 & 2 as it was not maintainable under Sections 9 & 18 of the Act of 2001. He, therefore, prays that the revision petition be allowed, the order dated 05.12.2019 be quashed and set aside and the application filed by them under Order 7 Rule 11 read with Section 151 CPC be allowed.

¶22

Per contra, learned counsel for the respondents No.1 & 2 submits that the learned Tribunal has rightly dismissed the application filed by the petitioners which does not warrant any interference by this Court. She, therefore, prays for dismissal of the revision petition.

¶23

Heard. Considered.

¶24

The petitioners have filed the application under Order 7 Rule 11 read with Section 151 CPC stating therein that since, the dispute arises out of a registered lease deed, only the Civil Court had jurisdiction to entertain the dispute and not the Rent Tribunal. In view of Section 18 of the Act of 2001, all the disputes arising in between the landlord and the tenant can only be entertained by the Rent Tribunal and not by the Civil Court. This relationship is

¶25

(3 of 3)

¶26

[CR-7/2020]

¶27

not disputed by the petitioners. In view thereof, in the considered opinion of this Court, the learned Tribunal did not err in dismissing the application filed by the petitioners.

¶28

This revision petition is dismissed being devoid of

¶29

merit.

¶30

(MAHENDAR KUMAR GOYAL),J

¶31

Satyendra/74

P.N. Baburajan S/O Shri Neelamberan Rajan v. Amarchand Goyal S/O Late Jagdishnarayan Goyal

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

P.N. Baburajan S/O Shri Neelamberan Rajan v. Amarchand Goyal S/O Late Jagdishnarayan Goyal

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

Ikram Hussain and Ors. Vs Madan and Safi and Ors.

Ved Vyas Vs Vinodi Lal and Ors.

Milap Chand and Ors. Vs Punya and Ors.

Hasan Ali Khatri S/O Sh. Tayyab Ali Khatri Vs State of Rajasthan through Its Principal Secretary (Admn.)

Ishwar Sharma Vs State of Raj and Ors.

Sheela Dhabhai W/O Late Shri Radheshyam Dhabhai Vs Brajmohan Gurjar S/O Late Shri Radheshyam Dhabhai