Sangeet Lodha, J. - (1.) THIS writ petition is directed against order dated 24.7.15 of the Appellate Rent Tribunal, Chittorgarh, whereby the appeal preferred by the petitioners against the order dated 22.12.12 of the Rent Tribunal, Chittorgarh directing the petitioners to hand over the vacant possession of a residential premises to the respondent, within a period of three months and to pay the arrear of rent and mesne profit, stands dismissed.
(2.) THE relevant facts are that the respondent preferred a petition under the provisions of Rajasthan Rent Control Act, 2001 (for short "the Act") for recovery of possession of a residential premises invoking the provisions of Section 106 of the Transfer of Property Act, 1882. The respondent averred in the petition that premises in question was let out to the petitioners herein on 1.5.07 for monthly rent Rs. 3,000/ -. The respondent claimed that the petitioners did not pay the rent for the period from 1.7.07 to 30.6.10 for 36 months quantified at Rs. 1,08,000/ -. The respondent averred that despite notice being served upon petitioners by registered A/D terminating the tenancy, the possession of the premises has not been handed over. The petition was contested by the petitioners denying that the disputed premises was let out by the respondents to the petitioners on 1.5.07 on monthly rent Rs. 3,000/ -. According to the petitioners, the residential premises ad measuring 1071 sq. ft. consisting of two rooms, kitchen, latrine and bathroom was let out by the respondent to Bharat Singh, the petitioner No. 2 herein. It was averred that the remaining portion of the premises was handed over by Shri Sunil Nagauri to Smt. Laxmi Kanwar, the petitioner No. 1 herein, in lieu of Rs. 2,50,000/ -. At the same time, the petitioners claimed that the respondent entered into an agreement to sell of the disputed premises with Smt. Laxmi Kanwar on 21.5.07 for consideration of Rs. 12,50,000/ - and against the consideration agreed upon, a sum of Rs. 1,00,000/ - was paid in advance and thereafter, a sum of Rs. 6,00,000/ - was paid by Smt. Laxmi Kanwar to the respondent by banker cheque on 31.12.07 and a sum of Rs. 2,50,000/ - was paid to Mr. Sunil Nagori by Smt. Laxmi Kanwar, as aforesaid. Accordingly, it was averred that Shri Bharat Singh, the petitioner No. 2 herein, is occupying the premises as tenant whereas, Smt. Laxmi Kanwar is in possession thereof on the strength of agreement to sell.
(3.) ON the basis of the pleadings of the parties, the Rent Tribunal framed the issues and parties led their evidence. After due consideration of the evidence on record, the Rent Tribunal arrived at the finding that the petitioners were occupying the premises in question as tenant for monthly rent Rs. 3,000/ -. The agreement to sell alleged to have been executed by the respondent in favour of the petitioners herein, was found inadmissible in evidence. The Rent Tribunal found that there is no evidence on record showing that the amount towards the sale consideration was paid by the petitioner No. 1 herein to the respondent by banker cheque. Accordingly, the Rent Tribunal found that the mandate of provisions of Section 106 of the Transfer of Property Act, 1882 stands complied with and thus, the respondent is entitled for vacant possession of the premises in question.;