Dismissed

Shri Chandrakishore Gupta S/O Shri Prabhudayal Gupta v. Shri Mahesh Chand Gupta S/O Shri Dharmchand Gupta

Rajasthan HC8 Apr 2025CW/4849/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court dismissed a writ petition challenging an order by the Rent Tribunal that allowed substitution of a respondent in a rent eviction matter. The Tribunal had held that landlord-tenant relationship and title under the Will could be decided on evidence at the appropriate stage, allowing cross-examination.

What the court decided

AI extract

Shri Chandrakishore Gupta S/O Shri Prabhudayal Gupta… — Landlord and Tenant | Rajasthan HC (2025)

¶1

[2025:RJ-JP:15603]

¶2

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR

¶3

S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 4849/2025

¶4

Shri Chandrakishore Gupta S/o Shri Prabhudayal Gupta, R/o 136/23, Kesarganj, Behind Police Chowki, Kesarganj, Ajmer.

¶5

----Petitioner

¶6

Versus

¶7

Shri Mahesh Chand Gupta S/o Shri Dharmchand Gupta, R/o Padma Bhawan, Kesarganj, Ajmer (Deceased) Through Legal Heir Smt. Kusumlata W/o Shri Mahesh Chand Gupta, R/o Chatai Mohalla, Kesarganj, Ajmer (Established By Order Of Learned Court) Smt. Bharti Gupta W/o Shri Vinod Gupta, R/o Chatai Mohalla, Kesarganj, Ajmer.

¶8

Shri Chandraprakash Gupta S/o Shri Prabhudayal, R/o 136/23, Kesarganj, Behind Police Chowki, Kesarganj, Ajmer

¶9

----Respondents

¶10

For Petitioner(s)	: Mr.	Rahul Agarwal
For Respondent(s)	:

¶11

JUSTICE ANOOP KUMAR DHAND

¶12

Order

¶13

08/04/2025

¶14

By way of filing this writ petition, a challenge has been led to the impugned order dated 14.02.2025 passed by the Rent Tribunal, Ajmer (for short, ‘the Tribunal’) by which the application filed by Smt. Bharti Gupta under Order 22 Rule 10 CPC read with Section 21 of the Rajasthan Rent Control Act, 2001 (for short, ‘the Act of 2021’) and Section 151 CPC has been allowed and the said Bharti Gupta has been substituted in the array of cause title of the rent eviction application submitted by one Maheshchand Gupta.

[2025:RJ-JP:15603]

[CW-4849/2025]

(2 of 3)

Counsel for the petitioner submits that the premises in question was let out to the petitioner by one Mahesh Chand Gupta and he filed an application under Section 9 of the Act of 2001 before the Tribunal. Counsel submits that during the pendency of the said application, he passed away, hence his wife Kusumlata was substituted who also passed away, later. Counsel submits that thereafter an application under Order 22 Rule 10 CPC read with Section 21 of the Act of 2001 was submitted by one Bharti Gupta on the basis of registered Will executed by the Gokli Devi who happens to the mother of late Mahesh Chand Gupta. Counsel submits that the premises was never let out by Gokli Devi, hence under these circumstances, on the basis of the Will executed by her in favour of Bharti Gupta, she cannot be treated as landlord of the petitioner but this fact has been overlooked by the Tribunal while allowing the application filed by her, hence under these circumstances, interference of this Court is warranted.

¶19

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

¶20

Perusal of the impugned order indicates that after taking note of the aforesaid factual aspect of the matter, the Tribunal was of the view that the relationship of landlord and tenant would be determined on the basis of the evidence led by the both sides and the petitioner would be at liberty to cross- examine the said applicant Bharti Gupta at the appropriate stage.

¶21

This Court finds no error in the impugned order passed by the Tribunal, which requires any interference of this Court. 6. Accordingly, the present writ petition stands dismissed.

[2025:RJ-JP:15603]

[CW-4849/2025]

(3 of 3)

Stay application and all pending application(s), if any, also stand dismissed.

¶26

(ANOOP KUMAR DHAND),J

¶27

Ashu/9

Shri Chandrakishore Gupta S/O Shri Prabhudayal Gupta v. Shri Mahesh Chand Gupta S/O Shri Dharmchand Gupta

Case brief

What is this about?

What the court decided

Shri Chandrakishore Gupta S/O Shri Prabhudayal Gupta v. Shri Mahesh Chand Gupta S/O Shri Dharmchand Gupta

Case brief

What is this about?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Onkarlal Meena Vs State Revenu Departmentors

Sitaram S/O Puran Vs Executive Engineer

Bhavna Sharma Vs State Education Departmentors

Managing Committee Dayanand Bal Niketan Vs Barkha Lawas and Anr.

Managing Committee D a v Uchh Vs Niranjan Bagri and Anr.

Managing Committee D a v Uchh Vs Smt Rekha Joshi and Anr.