JUDGEMENT
GOVIND MATHUR,J. -
(1.) To examine correctness of the judgment dated 24.9.2015, passed by learned Single Bench, this appeal is before us.
(2.) The facts relevant are that in the year 1969, one Shri Bahadur Singh Kothari rented out a premises to Shri Sukhlal, father of the
appellant-petitioners. The landlord had temporary possession of a part of
the rented premises being required for some marriage in family. The
possession of the premises aforesaid, however, was not handed over to the
tenant, therefore, a suit for recovery of possession was preferred which
came to be decreed in favour of the plaintiff tenant on 22.8.1994. An
appeal preferred by the landlord also came to be dismissed under the
judgment and decree dated 8.2.1996. The possession of the premises in
question was handed over to the plaintiff tenant as a consequence to the
execution of decree after dismissal of the second appeal vide judgment
and decree dated 22.3.1996. Suffice to mention that during pendency of
litigation the rented premises was purchased by Jain Shwetambar Oswal
Samaj (hereinafter referred to as 'the Samaj'). The Samaj preferred a
suit for eviction of the tenant from the rented premises on the ground of
bona fide necessity, default in payment of rent and availability of
alternative accommodation to tenant. The suit came to be decreed by the
trial court under the judgment dated 2.5.1998. The tenant being aggrieved
by the judgment and decree dated 2.5.1998 preferred an appeal before the
court of learned District Judge, Banswara.
(3.) During pendency of the appeal, Shri Godi Parshwanath Shwetambar Jain Mandir Bawan Deri Trust, Banswara (hereinafter referred to as 'the
Trust') claiming itself to be owner of property, terminated the tenancy
of the tenant petitioners invoking provisions of Section 106/111 of the
Transfer of Property Act, 1882. It was also disclosed in the notice dated
5.3.1999 that the State of Rajasthan by invoking powers under sub-section (3) of Section 2 of the Rajasthan Premises (Control of Rent and Eviction)
Act, 1950 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act of 1950') exempted the
Trust from applicability of the provisions of the aforesaid Act. The
tenant petitioners responded the notice with several objections, but
ultimately preferred a petition for writ giving challenge to the
notification of the State of Rajasthan dated 12.11.1998. The case of the
petitioners before learned Single Bench was that the State Government
while invoking powers under sub-section(3) of Section 2 of the Act of
1950 did not apply its mind and as such the same is bad.;
Click here to view full judgement.
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.