Rajasthan High Court
Gopal Agarwal S/O Shri Shsiv Kumar ... vs M/S. Chandak Holdings Private ... on 9 February, 2023
Bench: Ganesh Ram Meena
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN
BENCH AT JAIPUR
S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 2575/2021
Gopal Agarwal S/o Shri Shsiv Kumar Agarwal, Aged About 37
Years, Proprietor M/s. Design, G-2,3,4 And 5, City Plaza,
Jhotwara Road, Banipark, Jaipur At Present R/o D-141,
Ambabari, Near Jain Nursing Home, Jaipur
----Petitioner
Versus
M/s. Chandak Holdings Private Limited, D-53, Ganesh Park
Ambabari, Jaipur Through Its Director Dinesh Agarwal S/o Shri
Radheyshyam Agarwal
----Respondent
For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Jitendra Singh
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE GANESH RAM MEENA
Order
09/02/2023
This writ petition has been preferred assailing the judgment
dated 27/1/2021 passed by the Appellate Rent Tribunal, Jaipur
Metropolitan-I dismissing the appeal of the petitioner-tenant and
affirming the order dated 9/5/2019 passed by the Rent Tribunal,
Jaipur Metropolitan who disposed of the application filed by the
respondent-landlord under section 9 of the Rajasthan Rent Control
Act, 2001 (for short, 'the Act of 2001') in the following manner:
Þ¼1½ fd izR;FkhZ dks vkns'k fn;k tkrk gS fd og fdjk;s'kqnk
ifjlj ftldk fooj.k vthZ dh en la[;k 3 esa fn;k x;k gS]
dk 'kkafriwoZd o [kkyh dCtk lgh gkyr esa vkt fnukad ls N%
ekg ds vanj&vanj vthZnkj dks lqiqnZ djsA
¼2½ fd vthZnkj izR;FkhZ ls cdk;k fdjk;k isVs
8]34][email protected]& :i;s izkIr djus dk vf/kdkjh gSA
¼3½ fd ;kfpdk is'k gksus ls dCtk izkfIr rd dh vof/k ds fy;s
ifjlj ds mi;ksx miHkksx ds var%dkyhu ykHk ds :i esa
vthZnkj] izR;fFkZ;k ls dqy 40][email protected]& :i;s izfrekg dh nj ls
(2 of 3) [CW-2575/2021]
jkf'k izkfIr dk vf/kdkjh gksxk o vf/kfu;e dh /kkjk 20¼3½ ds
vuqlkj fofgr le;kof/k esa dCtk ugha fn;k tkrk gS rks
var%dkyhu ykHk dh jkf'k mDr izko/kku vuqlkj rhu xq.kk dh
nj ls ns; gksxhA
¼4½ fd vthZ ds fopkj.k ds nkSjku fdjk;s isVs ;fn dksbZ jkf'k
izR;fFkZ;k }kjk vthZnkj dks vnk dh x;h gS rks og jkf'k
lek;kstu ;ksX; gSA
¼5½ [kpkZ i{kdkjku viuk&viuk ogu djsaxsA
¼6½ vuqlwph Þxß dk izek.k&i= cuk;k tkosA
¼7½ bl vkns'k dh ,d izfr izR;fFkZ;k dks vf/kfu;e] 2001 dh
/kkjk&17 ds rgr fu%'kqYd nh tkos rFkk ml ij uksV vafdr
fd;k tkos fd ,slh izfr mls fu%'kqYd iznku dh xbZ gSA
i{kdkjku vihy ds iz;kstu ls ekuuh; vihyh; fdjk;k
vf/kdj.k t;iqj egkuxj] t;iqj esa fnukad 22-07-2019 dks
mifLFkr gksAß
Counsel for the petitioner submits that the learned court
below have committed illegality in entertaining and trying the
eviction petition filed by the landord under the Act of 2001 in clear
contravention of the provisions of Chapter-II and III of the Act of
2001. Counsel submits that the applicant should have filed a civil
suit as the application under the Rent Control Act is not
maintainable. He has further submitted that the documents
exhibited are to be proved under the Evidence Act but the
applicant has not proved any document. Section 3 of the Act of
2001 provides that Chapter II and III not to apply certain
premises and tenancies including the premises belonging to or let
out by the Central Government or the State Government.
Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and perused the
material available on record.
The Appellate Tribunal, after considering various judgments,
has observed that the respondent-company is not covered under sub
section 5 of Section 3 of the Act of 2001. Petitioner has failed to
show that premises in question of this litigation belongs to or let out
by any body/corporate constituted by a Central Act or a Rajasthan
(3 of 3) [CW-2575/2021]
Act. Submission of learned counsel for the petitioner is that the
learned Appellate Tribunal has erred in allowing Exs. 1 to 11 which
have not been proved in evidence by the applicants. In this regard, I
find that the petitioner has not made any submission before the
Appellate Tribunal.
In view of the above, I am not inclined to interfere in the
orders passed by the Rent Tribunal as also in the order passed the
Rent Appellate Tribunal in exercise of the powers vested under
Article 227 of the Constitution of India.
Accordingly, the writ petition is dismissed.
(GANESH RAM MEENA),J
OM PRAKASH /38
Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)
