- (1.) THIS petition has been filed challenging the order dated 6-7- 2011 passed by the New constituted Rent Tribunal, Jaipur Metropolitan (hereinafter 'the Tribunal') in case No.1023/2006.
(2.) A perusal of the impugned order dated 6-7-2011 indicates that on an ex-parte proceedings initiated against the petitioner- tenant (hereinafter 'the tenant') on an application under Order 9 Rule 7 CPC having been filed by the tenant before the learned Tribunal praying therein to set-aside the ex-parte proceedings, the learned Tribunal vide order dated 31-5-2011 set-aside the ex-parte proceedings against the tenant. As the eviction petition was pending since 2004, the learned Tribunal directed the tenant to file the reply to eviction petition on or before the next date of hearing and to pay costs of Rs.5000.00 through cheque to the landlord. It appears that the tenant failed to comply with the order dated 31-5-2011. Instead on the matter coming up before the Tribunal on the next date, the tenant moved an application asking for the supply of a copy of the eviction petition for facilitating filing of a reply thereto. Conversely, the landlord moved an application for closing of right to file reply to eviction petition in view of the tenant having failed to comply with the conditions of the order dated 31-5- 2011 in not filing the reply to eviction petition by the next date 6-7- 2011 when the matter came up before the Tribunal, and also having failed to pay to the landlord costs of Rs.5000.00 as directed by the Tribunal in its order dated 31-5-2011.
(3.) LEARNED counsel for the tenant has submitted that the amount of costs Rs.5000.00 could not be given to the landlord as directed by the Tribunal in its order dated 31-5-2011 because the tenant did not have any leafs in his cheque-book and had been trying to obtain fresh cheque-book from the Bank. It was submitted that the reply to eviction petition could not be filed, as directed by the Tribunal on 31-5-2011, in view of the fact that the copy of eviction petition had not been supplied to the tenant by the landlord. The same arguments were advanced before the Tribunal, and the Tribunal found that the grounds for non-compliance of the conditional order dated 31-5- 2011 were specious, inasmuch as if the cheque-book was not available with the tenant, it was for him to have obtained it from the Bank with some urgency to comply with the order dated 31-5-2011 and that if the copy of the eviction petition was not available with the tenant he could have obtained it.;