Dismissed

Mohd Isahaq S/O Late Mohd. Ibrahim v. Mohd. Rafeeq S/O Abdul Majeed

Rajasthan HC4 Nov 2023CW/17847/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Rajasthan High Court dismissed a writ petition challenging the dismissal of an amendment application under CrPC Order 6 Rule 17 read with Section 151. The court held that the Rent Tribunal correctly denied amendment as facts were denied, issues were framed, and no harassment was shown warranting interference under Article 227. Citation to 2022 LiveLaw SC 729 was noted but not followed.

What did the court decide?

Writ petition stands dismissed; no relief granted against the Rent Tribunal's order.

Mohd Isahaq S/O Late Mohd. Ibrahim Vs Mohd. Rafeeq S/O… — Landlord and Tenant | Rajasthan HC (2023)

¶1

[2023:RJ-JP:33146]

¶2

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR

¶3

S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 17847/2023

¶4

Mohd Isahaq S/o Late Mohd. Ibrahim, Aged About 67 Years, R/o House No. 3541, Jagannath Shah Ka Rasta, Bariyon Ki Gali, Char Darwaza, Chokdi Ramchandraji, Jaipur.

¶5

Mohd Ayub S/o Late Mohd. Ibrahim, Aged About 61 Years, R/o House No. Maliyo Ki Gali, Phuta Khurra, Jaipur.

¶6

----Petitioners

¶7

Versus

¶8

Mohd. Rafeeq S/o Abdul Majeed, Aged About 66 Years, R/o House No. 2319, Purani Delhi Ka Rasta, Mohalla Kamnigaran, Kanwtiyon Ka Khurra, Chokdi Ramchandraji, Jaipur

¶9

Mohd Yaqoob S/o Late Mohd. Ibrahim, Aged About 64 Years, R/o House No. 48, Dr. Shafaqat Colony, Behind Madina Masjid, Outside Char Darwaza, Jaipur.

¶10

Abdul Qayyum S/o Late Mohd. Ibrahim, Aged About 57 Years, R/o House No. 2052, Mohalla Neelgaran, Near Masjid Azizullah And Jabbar Tandoor Wala, Chokdi Ramchandraji, Jaipur.

¶11

Mohd. Idris S/o Late Mohd. Ibrahim, Aged About 53 Years, R/o House No. 2052, Mohalla Neelgaran, Near Masjid Azizullah And Jabbar Tandoor Wala, Chokdi Ramchandraji, Jaipur.

¶12

Usman @ Pappi S/o Late Mohd. Ibrahim, Aged About 47 Years, R/o House No. 2052, Mohalla Neelgaran, Near Masjid Azizullah And Jabbar Tandoor Wala, Chokdi Ramchandraji, Jaipur.

¶13

Mohd. Iliyas S/o Late Mohd. Ibrahim, R/o House No. 2052, Mohalla Neelgaran, Near Masjid Azizullah And Jabbar Tandoor Wala, Chokdi Ramchandraji, Jaipur.

¶14

----Respondents

¶15

For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Z.A. Naqvi, Sr. Adv., assisted by Mr. Naqvi Sehban For Respondent(s) :

(2 of 3)

[2023:RJ-JP:33146]

[CW-17847/2023]

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE INDERJEET SINGH

¶20

Order

¶21

04/11/2023

¶22

Instant writ petition has been filed by the petitionersdefendants challenging the order dated 11.08.2023 passed by the learned Rent Tribunal, whereby, the application filed on behalf of the petitioners-defendants under Order 6 Rule 17 read with Section 151 CPC was dismissed.

¶23

Brief facts of the case are that the respondents-plaintiffs filed eviction application before the learned Rent Tribunal. During the pendency of the eviction application, the petitioners-defendants filed an application under Order 6 Rule 17 read with Section 151 CPC, which was dismissed by the learned Rent Tribunal vide its order dated 11.08.2023. Hence, the present writ petition has been filed by the petitioners-defendants challenging the order dated 11.08.2023 passed by the learned Rent Tribunal.

¶24

Mr. Z.A. Naqvi, learned senior counsel assisted by Mr. Naqvi Sehban, Adv., appearing on behalf of the petitioners-defendants submits that the earlier suit for eviction was filed on behalf of the respondents-plaintiffs, which was dismissed by the learned Rent Tribunal. During pendency of the eviction application, three other shops which belongs to the respondents-plaintiffs have been vacated by other tenants, therefore, the amendment in the written statement is necessary. Learned Senior counsel further submits that the amendment application can be filed at any stage of the suit proceedings. In support of his contention, counsel relied upon the judgment passed by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the matter

(3 of 3)

[2023:RJ-JP:33146]

[CW-17847/2023]

of Life Insurance Corporation of India Vs. Sanjeev Builders Private Limited & Anr., reported in 2022 LiveLaw (SC) 729 .

¶29

Heard learned senior counsel for the petitioners-defendants and perused the record.

¶30

This writ petition filed on behalf of the petitioners-defendants deserves to be dismissed; for the reasons, firstly, the respondents-plaintiffs have denied the facts mentioned in the application, secondly, the learned Rent Tribunal has framed issue No.2 with regard to bona fide necessity and burden to prove, the said issue is upon the respondents-plaintiffs, thirdly, the petitioners-defendants are having the opportunity to crossexamine the respondents-plaintiffs at the time of recording of their statement with regard to these facts, lastly, considering the facts and circumstances of the present case, no case is made out for interference by this Court under Article 227 of the Constitution of India.

¶31

Hence, the present writ petition stands dismissed.

¶32

(INDERJEET SINGH),J

¶33

Upendra Pratap Singh /23

Mohd Isahaq S/O Late Mohd. Ibrahim v. Mohd. Rafeeq S/O Abdul Majeed

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Mohd Isahaq S/O Late Mohd. Ibrahim v. Mohd. Rafeeq S/O Abdul Majeed

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

M/S Thoughts Consultants Jaipur Pvt. Ltd. Vs the Assistant Provident Fund Commissioner

M/S. Nagar Nigam Greater Jaipur Vs the Regional Provident Fund Commissioner I

Amit Kumar S/O Shri Ashok Kumar Vs the District Supply Officer

Murtuza Sumer Siddiqui S/O Shri Mujiburahman Vs State of Rajasthan

Rajaram S/O Shri Ramrakh Vs Jaipur Development Authority

M/S Keshav Logistics Services Vs State of Rajasthan