Rajasthan High Court
Ikram Hussain S/O Shri Asgar Ali vs Anwar Hussain S/O Late Ramjan Ali on 11 October, 2022
Bench: Sudesh Bansal
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN
BENCH AT JAIPUR
S.B. Civil Revision Petition No. 86/2020
Ikram Hussain S/o Shri Asgar Ali, Aged About 56 Years, R/o
Indira Nagar, Near Lalpahadi, Jhunjhunu, Tehsil And District
Jhunjhunu (Raj)
----Petitioner
Versus
Anwar Hussain S/o Late Ramjan Ali, R/o Road No.1, Near
Punjab National Bank, Jhunjhunu, Tehsil And District Jhunjhunu
(Raj)
----Respondent
For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Majhar Hussain
For Respondent(s) : Ms. Sonia Shandilya with
Mr. Arnav Singh
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUDESH BANSAL
Judgment
11/10/2022
1. In the present case respondent-landlord has instituted an
eviction petition against petitioner-tenant on the ground of default
and bona fide necessity invoking provisions of Section 9 of the
Rajasthan Rent Control Act, 2001. Petitioner-tenant has moved an
application under Order VII Rule 11 CPC raising an objection that
respondent-landlord has not given statutory notice as required
under Section 9(a), therefore, the ground of default is not make
out and as such the eviction petition is liable to be rejected. The
eviction petition has been filed on the ground of default and
necessity. Accordingly, the application has been dismissed.
2. This Court finds that as far as objection raised by petitioner-
tenant is concerned, the same is liable to be considered while
deciding the ground of default on merits and cannot be
(2 of 2) [CR-148/2022]
adjudicated at the stage of deciding application under Order VII
Rule 11 CPC. Perusal of the pleadings of eviction petition as a
whole goes to show that respondent-landlord has pleaded that
prior to the present eviction petition, the rent between parties was
revised by the Rent Tribunal vide order dated 16.11.2007 which
was affirmed by the appellate Rent Tribunal vide judgment dated
06.02.2008, thereafter the tenant has committed default in
payment of rent.
3. In the backdrop of such pleadings as also for the reason that
the eviction petition is based on the ground of bona fide necessity,
the application filed by petitioner-tenant under Order VII Rule 11
CPC is wholly misconceived and is not liable to be accepted. The
Rent Tribunal has not committed any illegality or jurisdictional
error in dismissing the application as such impugned order dated
20.01.2020 does not call for any interference.
4. This Court, considering the nature of objections raised by
petitioner-tenant, has decided his application on merits however,
put a question to counsel for petitioner as well as from respondent
about the maintainability of this revision petition.
5. Since both counsel are unable to assist this Court on this
count, therefore, the issue of maintainability is left open to be
considered and decided in an appropriate case.
6. Accordingly, this revision petition is dismissed.
7. All pending application(s), if any, stand(s) disposed of.
(SUDESH BANSAL),J
SAURABH/84
Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)
