Disposed

Girraj Ghatiwala HUF v. Rajesh Bhargav Son of Late Shree Rishinath Ji Bhargav

Rajasthan HC7 Aug 2025CW/18838/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In this writ petition, the petitioner sought a direction for the Rent Tribunal to decide a pending eviction application within a time frame. Relying on the Apex Court's view not to issue timelines for case disposal, the Court dismissed the prayer but directed the Tribunal to try the matter expeditiously.

What did the court decide?

None. The Court directed the Rent Tribunal to decide the pending eviction application expeditiously.

Girraj Ghatiwala HUF Vs Rajesh Bhargav Son of Late… — Landlord and Tenant | Rajasthan HC (2025)

¶1

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR

¶2

S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 18838/2024

¶3

Girraj Ghatiwala Huf, Partaniyon Ka Rasta,johri Bazar, Jaipur Thorugh Its Karta Anil Ghatiwala Son Of Late Shree Girraj Ji Ghatiwala, Resident Of House No. 1557, Krishna Bhawan, Chaura Rasta, Jaipur.

¶4

----Petitioner

¶5

Versus

¶6

Rajesh Bhargav Son Of Late Shree Rishinath Ji Bhargav, Owner Of Firm Nath Chashmewala (Shop Ke Upper Nath Optician Ka Kaam Likha Hua Hain), Municipal No. 87,88, House No. 1557 Ke Neeche, Krishna Bhawan, Chaura Rasta, Jaipur 302003.

¶7

----Respondent

¶8

For Petitioner(s) : Mr. M.C. Jain For Respondent(s) :

¶9

JUSTICE ANOOP KUMAR DHAND

¶10

Order

¶11

07/08/2025

¶12

By way of filing this writ petition, a prayer has been made for issuing directions to the Rent Tribunal, Jaipur Metro-II to decide the case bearing No. 89/2022 filed by the petitioner under Section 9 of the Rajasthan Rent Control Act, 2001 (hereinafter referred to as “the Act of 2001”) within a time frame.

¶13

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has filed an application under Section 9 of the Rajasthan Rent Control Act, 2001, in the year 2022, for eviction of the respondent. Learned counsel submits that the same is lying pending for its adjudication, so appropriate directions be issued to the Tribunal to decide the said application expeditiously within a time frame.

¶14

[CW-18838/2024]

¶15

(2 of 2)

¶16

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

¶17

The Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of High Court Bar Association, Allahabad Vs. State of Uttar Pradesh, while deciding the Criminal Appeal No.3589/2023 has deprecated the practice of the Courts of issuing directions to the subordinate Courts to decide the matter in a timeline.

¶18

The aforesaid directions cannot be issued by this Court. But looking to the fact that the eviction application is pending since 2022, it is expected from the Rent Tribunal to make all possible endeavours to decide the eviction application expeditiously.

¶19

With the aforesaid observations/directions, the instant writ petition stands disposed of. All pending applications, if any, also stand disposed of.

¶20

(ANOOP KUMAR DHAND),J

¶21

Ashu/13

Girraj Ghatiwala HUF v. Rajesh Bhargav Son of Late Shree Rishinath Ji Bhargav

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Girraj Ghatiwala HUF v. Rajesh Bhargav Son of Late Shree Rishinath Ji Bhargav

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

Sua Devi Vs State Panchayati Raj Dep Ors.

Arman S/O Surendra Kumar Vs Central Board of Secondary Education

Smt. Madhushri Hada W/O Sh. Sangram Singh Vs Smt. Neelam Chaudhary W/O Sh. Anurag Chaudhary

Chhote Lal Meena S/O Late Shri Roshan Lal Meena Vs the State of Rajasthan

Nishant Bareth Son of Shri Rajeev Bareth Vs University of Rajasthan

Ramesh Chandra Katta S/O Late Shri Radhakrishna Ji Katta, Vs Dhan Prakash @ Sonu S/O Late Shri Suresh Chand Ji Kasera