- (1.) THIS petition has been filed challenging the order dated 10th May, 2012 passed by the Rent Tribunal, Kota.
(2.) THE facts of the case are that the landlord/respondent no.2 (hereinafter the landlord) Murtaja Hussain filed an eviction petition under Section 9 of the Rajasthan Rent Control Act, 2001 against the petitioner-tenant (hereinafter the tenant) inter alia on the ground that the tenant had been allotted Plot No. 195 on 5th April, 1997 by the Urban Improvement Trust, Kota and in support thereof Exh.5 photo copy of letter of allotment was filed by the landlord. The tenant denied that the allotment of Plot No. 195 on 5th April, 1997 by the UIT, Kota was subsisting and stated that the said allotment made by the UIT, Kota was cancelled and consequently the ground for eviction on this count was unsustainable. On issues being framed in the eviction petition, the landlord filed his affidavit in evidence and the tenant was required to cross-examine him. On the first occasion, the tenant sought an adjournment. On the subsequent occasion, instead of cross-examining the respondent/landlord, the tenant moved an application under Section 21 of the Act of 2001 with the prayer that the file of the UIT, Kota with regard to allotment of Plot No. 195 purportedly made to him on 5th April, 1997 be summoned for the purpose of proving that the said allotment had been cancelled. The learned Tribunal held that it was for the tenant to set up his defence on the basis of his oral or documentary evidence with him and it was not for the Tribunal to call for the file as prayed for from the UIT, Kota pertaining to Plot No. 195 to facilitate the tenant establish that the Plot No. 195 allotted to him had been cancelled.
(3.) I have considered the arguments of the learned counsel for the petitioner and perused the writ petition including the impugned order.;