Ajay Rastogi, J. - (1.) MATTER has come up on application under Article 226(3) of Constitution seeking vacation of interim order dt. 29.02.2008, hence at request, matter was finally heard at admission stage.
(2.) INSTANT petition has been filed by tenant (defendant) assailing judgments dt.04.08.2006 (Ann.1) of Rent Tribunal, Jaipur (Org. Appl.R. 78/04) and so also dt. 07.02.2008 (Ann.2) of Appellate Rent Tribunal, Jaipur City dismissing Appeal (Rent) -64/2006. Respondent No. 1 (Plaintiff) filed a suit under Section 6 & 9 of Rajasthan Rent Control Act, 2001 ("Rent Act") on 05/01/04 seeking revision of rent and eviction on the ground of default in payment of rent, as well as reasonable & bona fide personal need of suit premises.
(3.) AFTER pleadings of parties, the Rent Tribunal framed six issues as quoted in para 6 of writ petition ad infra: (i) Whether the tenant has committed default of not tendering the rent from 01.07.1997 and therefore, has committed default in payment of rent? (ii) Whether the premise is required reasonably & bonafidely by landlord? (iii) Whether the tenant has created nuisance as contemplated in para 10(a) of application? (iv) Whether the tenancy is of Rs. 1500/ - per month from January, 1997? (v) Whether the suit premises was on rent @ Rs. 700/ - per month from starting? (vi) Relief? After recording of the evidence on record, the Rent Tribunal recorded the finding as regards Issue No. 4 & 5 that since landlord was not able to prove about the rent as alleged by him except that the rent of Rs. 700/ - was agreed by tenant; as such the Tribunal held the rent of suit premises as Rs. 700/ - per month in the year 1996. As regards Issue No. 1, the Tribunal recorded finding that notice (Ex.15) was served upon tenant on 28.11.2003 while rent of Rs. 3,500/ - was deposited by him on 10.03.2004 which was much after 30 days of notice served (Ex.15). The Tribunal took note of evidence on record including of DW1 -Satish Jain (tenant) who in his cross examination deposed that whenever he remained unemployed, was not able to make regular monthly rent and similarly his wife Smt. Asha Jain (Dw2) in cross examination supported to aforesaid version of her husband. It was further deposed that on 10.03.2004, a sum of Rs. 3,500/ - was deposited and thereafter Rs. 2800/ - for 4 months' rent were not deposited. Finally, the Tribunal recorded the finding that the rent was neither paid nor tendered by tenant within thirty days of notice as provided under Section 9(a) of Rent Act. As regards Issue No. 2 in respect of reasonable and personal need, the Tribunal recorded a finding that suit was filed on 05.01.2004 while one of property in the name of wife of landlord was sold in August, 2000 and except the premises in dispute, he has no other premise for his own need despite he was residing in the same city of Kota in rented premises. As regards issue No. 3 in respect of nuisance, it was decided in favour of tenant. However, finally the suit was decreed with the direction to the tenant to vacate suit premises and hand over peaceful vacant possession whereof to the landlord within three months and would continue to pay monthly rent determined by the Tribunal vide judgment & decree dt. 04.08.2006, against which petitioner preferred appeal. Rent appellate Tribunal affirmed the findings recorded by rent Tribunal and consequently dismissed the appeal on 07.02.2008.;