Haribhagwan vs Bimla Devi And Anr
2022 Latest Caselaw 12240 Raj

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 14079/2017

Haribhagwan S/o Shri Balchand, B/c Beriya C/o Ghisulal Bal Chand, Aguna Bazar, Sujangarh, District Churu.

----Petitioner Versus

1. Bimla Devi W/o Late Shri Sita Ram, B/c Beriya R/o Naya Bazar, Sujangarh District Churu.

2. The Civil Judge, Sujangarh, District Churu.

----Respondents

For Petitioner(s) : Mr. D.D. Chitlangi For Respondent(s) : Mr. S.S. Ladrecha Mr. D.S. Pidiyar

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VINIT KUMAR MATHUR

Order

12/10/2022

1. The case comes up on an application (02/20) preferred by

the respondent stating therein that the controversy involved in the

present case is squarely covered by a judgment of this Court

passed in S.B. Civil Writ Petition No.3221/2017 (Megha Ram vs.

Bimla Devi) on 13/12/2021.

2. Learned counsel appearing for the respondents has pointed

out that in a similar matter this Court had passed a similar interim

order in Abdul Majid Vs. Chauthi Lal in SBCWP No.10728/2019 on

04.07.2019. The said order has been assailed in Chauthi Lal

Agarwal (since deceased) Vs. Abdul Majid in SLP No.15676/2021

before the Apex Court and the Apex Court vide order dated

10.08.2021 passed following order:-

"Delay Condoned.

(2 of 3) [CW-14079/2017]

Applications seeking exemption from filing official translation

and certified copy of the impugned order are allowed.

Issue notice.

Until further orders, there shall be stay of operation of the

impugned interim orders of the High Court. Tag with SLP(C)

No.1551/2018."

3. Learned counsel for the respondent/s submits that keeping in

view the order passed by the Supreme Court, the interim order

passed by this Court does not deserve to be extended.

4. This Court finds that the original judgment passed by this

Court in K. Ramnarayan Vs. Shri Pukhraj in DB Civil Ref No.1/2015

holding that the cases under the TP Act cannot be allowed to

continue has been stayed by the Supreme Court in Pukhraj Vs. K.

Ramnarayan in SLP No.1551/2018.

5. In view of the stay passed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court,

the trial Court would continue to have jurisdiction to decide the

case under the Transfer of Property Act as it existed and the new

Rent Control Act would have no retrospective application as per

the view taken by this Court, as the view of this Court has already

been stayed by Hon'ble Supreme Court.

6. In view thereof, the interim order passed by this Court in

writ petition is vacated and the writ petition is also dismissed.

However, it is made clear that in case, the Hon'ble Supreme Court

in SLP No.15676/2021, decides to make the Rent Control Act,

2001 applicable, either prospectively or retrospectively, which

obviously shall govern the field in the present case also, more

particularly, final adjudication thereof, and thus, in such an

(3 of 3) [CW-14079/2017]

eventuality, the petitioner shall be at liberty to move appropriate

application / petition, strictly in accordance with law.

7. All pending applications also stand disposed of accordingly.

(VINIT KUMAR MATHUR),J 240-SanjayS/-

Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)