SANGEET LODHA,J. - (1.) This petition is directed against order dated 8.12.15 passed by the Rent Tribunal, Udaipur, whereby an application preferred by the petitioner under Order 8, Rule 1A (3) of Civil Procedure Code, 1908 (CPC) read with Section 21 of Rajasthan Rent Control Act, 2001 (for short the Act of 2001), for taking documents on record, stands rejected.
(2.) The respondent has filed a petition seeking eviction of the petitioner from a commercial premises on the grounds of default in payment of rent and reasonable and bona fide requirement in terms of provisions of Section 9(a) and (i) of the Act of 2001. The petition is being contested by the petitioner by filing a reply thereto. While denying the bona fide requirement of the premises as pleaded, the petitioner has taken inter alia a specific stand that the respondent has let out one shop to Shri Rajkumar Vyas only two months prior to filing of the petition. According to the petitioner, had there been bona fide requirement of the premises for the respondent's daughter-in-law, the available premises would not have been let out by the respondent as aforesaid.
(3.) In the cross examination, on the question being put on behalf of the petitioner, the respondent Om Prakash (PW 1) has admitted that just two months before the filing of the petition, he had mortgaged one shop to Shri Rajkumar. The evidence of the respondent stands concluded and the matter is posted for petitioner's evidence. At this stage, the petitioner preferred an application as aforesaid for producing on record the documents i.e. the mortgage deeds executed by the respondent and his wife in favour of various persons. The application preferred stands rejected by the Rent Tribunal by the order impugned. Hence, this petition.;