Disposed

Hemendra Rana S/O Shri Pradyuman Kumar Rana v. Deepak Kapoor Son of Late. Mr. Hriday Narayan Kapoor

Rajasthan HC12 Mar 2024CW/1258/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In a writ petition, the High Court directed the Jaipur Rent Tribunal to decide a pending eviction application expeditiously without unnecessary adjournments, invoking the 120-day disposal mandate under Section 16(5) of the Rajasthan Rent Control Act, 2001.

What did the court decide?

Directed the Rent Tribunal to decide the eviction application expeditiously within 120 days of service of notice without unnecessary adjournments.

Hemendra Rana S/O Shri Pradyuman Kumar Rana Vs Deepak… — Landlord and Tenant | Rajasthan HC (2024)

¶1

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR

¶2

S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 1258/2024

¶3

Hemendra Rana S/o Shri Pradyuman Kumar Rana, Resident Of C-287, Pradhan Marg, Malviya Nagar, Jaipur 302017 and presently Resident 19913, Braemar Driver, Saratoga, California, U.S.A, through Power of Attorney Holder Yogender Rana S/o Shri Pradyuman Kumar Rana, Resident Of C-287, Pradhan Marg, Malviya Nagar, Jaipur 302017

¶4

Versus

¶5

Deepak Kapoor son of Late. Mr. Hriday Narayan Kapoor, Owner of Lions Den Gym Presently Tenant 2nd Floor, C 286, Pradhan Garg, Malviya Nagar, Jaipur 302017 and Resident Plot 83, Shivshakti Nagar- B, Jagatpura Road, Jaipur and Present Resident Of S-2 Soumya Sky Crown, C Block, Near DMart, Akshaya Patra Opp. Jagatpura Road, Jaipur.

¶6

----Respondent

¶7

For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Madhav Mitra, Sr. Adv. with Mr. Veerendra Singh, Adv. Mr. Rakesh Choudhary, Adv. Mr. Manav Sharma, Adv.

¶8

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANOOP KUMAR DHAND

¶9

Order

¶10

12/03/2024

¶11

By way of filing this writ petition, the petitioner is seeking directions against the Rent Tribunal No. 2, Jaipur Metropolitan-I, Jaipur (for short ‘the Rent Tribunal’) to dispose of the rent case No.172/2022 as soon as possible.

¶12

Counsel for the petitioner submits that a suit for eviction has been filed by the petitioner against the respondent before the Rent Tribunal. Counsel submits that opportunity of filing written statement by the respondent was closed on 04.05.2023 thereafter

¶13

[CW-1258/2024]

¶14

(2 of 4)

¶15

an application was submitted by the respondent to grant him one more opportunity for filing the written statement but in spite of passing of more than ten months, the said application has not been decided and the rent eviction case filed by the petitioner has not been decided. Counsel submits that as per the mandate contained under Section 16(5) of the Rajasthan Rent Control Act, 2001, (for short ‘the Act of 2001’), the eviction proceedings should finally be decided and disposed of within a period of 120 days from the date of service of notice on the tenant. Counsel submits that the tenant was served with the notice way back in the year 2022 and on 09.08.2022, the respondent has submitted power through his counsel for his appearance before the Rent Tribunal. Counsel submits that more than one and half years have passed and till date, no reply has been filed by the respondent. Counsel submits that looking to the urgency of the matter and looking to the mandatory provisions contained under Section 16(5) of the Act of 2001, a direction be issued to the Rent Tribunal to decide the eviction application expeditiously within a time frame. In support of his contention, counsel has placed reliance upon the following two judgments:-

¶16

(i) Hameed Kunju Vs. Nazimin reported in (2017) 8 SCC 611 and (ii) Radhika Mathur Vs. Mukesh Gupta and Ors. reported in S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 7778/2023 .

¶17

Heard and considered the submissions made at Bar and perused the material available on record.

¶18

This Court finds that an application under Section 9 of the Act of 2001 has been filed by the petitioner against the respondent before the Rent Tribunal on 12.07.2022 and the

¶19

[CW-1258/2024]

¶20

(3 of 4)

¶21

respondent has been served with the notice and he has put appearance before the Rent Tribunal on 02.08.2022 and in spite of seeking sufficient time, no reply was submitted, hence, on 04.05.2023, his application was rejected and his opportunity of filing written statement was closed and thereafter the case was posted for reconciliation proceedings. It appears that on the subsequent date, an application was submitted by the respondent for granting him opportunity to file written statement but the said application has not been decided by the Rent Tribunal till date. Hence, under these circumstances, the petitioner has approached this Court for seeking directions against the Rent Tribunal for speedy disposal of the matter.

¶22

This Court considering the fact that the Rent Tribunals are now having more eviction applications pending and as such, in order to regulate the procedure, necessary steps required are being taken from time to time and further dates are being given as per pendency of the cases. 6. This Court on perusal of Section 16(5) of the Act of 2001 finds that endeavour is required to be made to decide the eviction application expeditiously. The endeavour should be there to conclude the trial within a period of 120 days from the date of service of notice upon the respondent. This Court finds that the respondent was served with the notice on eviction application on 02.08.2022 and since then the matter is subjudice before the Rent Tribunal for passing appropriate orders. This Court finds that the Rent Tribunal should make every endeavour to decide the eviction application filed by the petitioner in expeditious manner.

¶23

(4 of 4)

¶24

[CW-1258/2024]

¶25

The instant writ petition stands disposed of with direction to the Rent Tribunal that no unnecessary adjournment should be granted to the parties and all efforts should be made to conclude the proceedings in the expeditious manner and the object of early disposal of the petition as required under Section 16(5) of the Act of 2001 be kept in mind while deciding the eviction petition filed by the petitioner.

¶26

With the aforesaid directions, the instant writ petition stands disposed of. All application(s) (pending, if any) also stand disposed of.

¶27

(ANOOP KUMAR DHAND),J

¶28

MR/56

Hemendra Rana S/O Shri Pradyuman Kumar Rana v. Deepak Kapoor Son of Late. Mr. Hriday Narayan Kapoor

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Hemendra Rana S/O Shri Pradyuman Kumar Rana v. Deepak Kapoor Son of Late. Mr. Hriday Narayan Kapoor

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

Sachin Kumar Son of Shri Raj Narayan Jangid Vs Union of India

Jagdish Narayan Meena Son of Sh. Kalyan Sahay Vs Sh. Ramavter Gurjar

Santosh Kumar Poddar Son of Shri Prabhudayal Poddar Vs Shri Shyam Khandelwal

Neha Tyagi D/O Vinod Kumar Tyagi Vs the Union of India

Sarita Kumari Dudi Wife of Shri Arvind Kumar Vs District Magistrate

Heera Lal S/O Sh. Kishan Singh Vs State of Rajasthan