Rajasthan High Court
M/S Selmore vs Bhopal Singh Galundia Son Of Late ... on 12 October, 2022
Bench: Mahendar Kumar Goyal
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN
BENCH AT JAIPUR
S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 4475/2021
M/s Selmore
----Petitioner
Versus
Bhopal Singh Galundia Son Of Late Himmat Singh Galundia
----Respondent
For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Anant Kasliwal, Sr. Adv. with
Mr. Amitabh Verma
Mr. Shashank Kasliwal, Adv.
Mr. Vaibhav Kasliwal, Adv.
Mr. Divakar Khaldwa
Ms. Charu Pareek
For Respondent(s) : Mr. Dinesh Kala, Adv. with
Mr. Rahul Sharma, Adv.
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MAHENDAR KUMAR GOYAL
Order
12/10/2022
Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the findings
of the learned Appellate Rent Tribunal on issue No.2, i.e.,
acquisition of alternative accommodation by the petitioner/non-
applicant/tenant, vide its judgment dated 15.02.2021 are
perverse. Referring to the pleadings of the parties as also the oral
and documentary evidence available on record, learned counsel
would submit that there was not even an iota of evidence to show
that the petitioner has acquired any alternative accommodation
after the subject property was let out to it and the learned
Appellate Rent Tribunal erred in shifting onus of proof of issue
No.2 upon the petitioner even when the
respondent/applicant/landlord has failed to discharge his initial
burden. He submits that merely on the basis that firms-Shashi
(2 of 3) [CW-4475/2021]
Engicons Private Limited and M/s. Selmore belong to it, an
inference has been drawn by the learned Appellate Rent Tribunal,
resorting to the provisions of Section 106 of Indian Evidence Act,
1872, that the property comprising of basement No.A-2, Plot
No.D-183, Bhrigu Marg, Kanti Chandra Road, Jaipur has been
acquired by it. Learned counsel submits that the learned Appellate
Rent Tribunal exceeded in its jurisdiction in interefering with the
well reasoned findings recorded by the learned Rent Tribunal vide
its judgment dated 06.10.2017 on issue No.2. He, therefore, prays
that the writ petition be allowed and the judgment dated
15.02.2021 be quashed and set aside.
Per contra, learned counsel for the respondent submits that
the findings of the learned Appellate Rent Tribunal qua issue No.2
are based on appreciation of evidence available on record which
warrant no interference of this Court under its limited supervisory
jurisdiction vide Article 227 of the Constitution of India. He,
therefore, prays for dismissal of the writ petition.
Heard. Considered.
A perusal of the material on the record reveals that the
respondent has failed to lead any evidence to show the property of
basement No.A-2, Plot No.D-183, Bhrigu Marg, Kanti Chandra
Road, Jaipur was acquired by the petitioner after the subject
property was let out to it. Learned Appellate Rent Tribunal has
reversed the finding in favour of the respondent vide issue No.2
merely on the basis that the petitioner has failed to specify as to
where the office and godown of M/s. Shashi Engicons Private
Limited existed.
This Court is not prima facie satisfied that the
respondent/applicant was able to discharge initial burden of proof
(3 of 3) [CW-4475/2021]
of the issue No.2 upon him so that onus could have been shifted
upon the petitioner. The matter requires consideration.
Admit.
Heard learned counsels on interim relief.
Taking into consideration the contentions advanced by the
learned counsels for the respective parties and material on record,
this Court deems it just and proper to stay the operation and
effect of the judgment dated 15.02.2021 passed by learned
Appellate Rent Tribunal, Jaipur Metropolitan-I in Civil Appeal
No.22/2018, till disposal of the writ petition.
The stay application stands disposed of accordingly.
(MAHENDAR KUMAR GOYAL),J
CHARU SONI /194
Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)
