OM PRAKASH GUPTA Vs. JAGDISH KUMAR SONI
LAWS(RAJ)-2015-4-379
HIGH COURT OF RAJASTHAN
Decided on April 08,2015

OM PRAKASH GUPTA Appellant
VERSUS
Jagdish Kumar Soni Respondents

JUDGEMENT

- (1.) A challenge has been made by the petitioner-landlord (hereinafter 'the landlord') to the order dt. 29-11-2013 passed by District Judge Baran as the Appellate Rent Tribunal (hereinafter 'the Appellate Rent Tribunal') under the Rajasthan Rent Courol Act, 2001 (hereinafter Rs. 2001 Act').
(2.) Counsel for the landlord has submitted that the order dt. 29-11-2013 is vitiated inasmuch as the Appellate Rent Tribunal, subsequent to remand under order dt. 18-7-2013 passed by this Court in SBCWP No.10298/2011, has failed to address, despite directions of this Court, the case of the landlord with reference to ground agitated under Sec. 9(j) of the 2001 Act, whereunder eviction of the tenant is to be directed where the tenant has built or acquired vacant possession or has been allotted a premises suitable/ adequate for his requirement. It has been submitted that vide order dt. 18-7-2013, this Court directed as under:- "Both the Senior Counsel appearing for the respective parties jointly agreed to a disposal of the instant petition on the following terms:- 1. The order dt. 8-7-2011 passed by the Appellate Rent Tribunal, Baran is quashed and set aside to the extent of the petitioner landlord being denied the right to pursue his eviction proceedings under the Act of Rajasthan Rent Control Act, 2001 in respect of grounds based on default under Sec.s 9(a), 9(j) as also under Sec. 6 of the Act of 2001 Act for revision of rent; 2. The landlord shall not be allowed to agitate the ground based on bonafide and reasonable necessity under Sec. 9(i) of the Act of 2001 in view of the withdrawal of the suit pending before the competent civil Court under its order dt. 11.11.2003; 3. The Appellate Rent Tribunal Baran shall decide the appeal now under remand to it within a period of four months of presentation of certified copy of this order."
(3.) Counsel for the landlord has submitted that therefore following the remand, the Appellate Rent Tribunal was under a duty to address the case of the landlord with reference to evidence before it qua Section 9(j) of the 2001 Act.;


Click here to view full judgement.
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.