Rajasthan High Court
Krishi Seva Kendra vs Ashok Kumar S/O Shri Fakirchand ... on 14 February, 2024
Author: Mahendar Kumar Goyal
Bench: Mahendar Kumar Goyal
[2024:RJ-JP:7651]
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN
BENCH AT JAIPUR
S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 1833/2024
Krishi Seva Kendra, Numaish Road, Bharatpur, Through Its
Owner Shri Kedarnath S/o Shri Shyam Lal Aged About 65 Years
R/o Krishi Seva Kendra, Numaish Road, Bharatpur.
----Petitioner/Non-Applicant
Versus
1. Ashok Kumar S/o Shri Fakirchand, R/o Budh Ki Hat,
Bharatpur.
2. Pradeep Kumar S/o Shri Fakirchand, R/o Budh Ki Hat,
Bharatpur.
----Respondents/Applicants
For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Rameshwar Prasad Sharma with
Mr. Sunil Kumar Chechi
For Respondent(s) :
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MAHENDAR KUMAR GOYAL
Judgment / Order
14/02/2024
This civil writ petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of
India has been filed assailing the legality and validity of the order
dated 17.11.2023 passed by the learned Appellate Rent Tribunal,
Bharatpur (Rajasthan) (for brevity "the learned Appellate Rent
Tribunal") in Regular Rent Appeal No.21/2012 (CIS No.08/2014),
whereby, while dismissing the appeal preferred by the
petitioner/non-applicant/tenant (for brevity "the tenant"), the
judgment dated 16.05.2012 passed by the learned Rent Tribunal,
Bharatpur (Raj.) (hereinafter referred to as "the learned Tribunal")
allowing the application No.14/2010 filed by the
respondents/applicants/landlords (for short "the landlords"), has
been affirmed.
[2024:RJ-JP:7651] (2 of 3) [CW-1833/2024]
Assailing the impugned judgment, the only contention
advanced by the learned counsel for the tenant is that his eviction
has been ordered inter-alia on the ground of reasonable &
bonafide necessity of landlords' sister-Smt. Pushpa and since, she
had expired during pendency of the rent application, the necessity
had come to an end. He, therefore, prays that the writ petition be
allowed, the judgment dated 17.11.2023 be quashed and set
aside and the application filed by the landlords seeking eviction be
dismissed.
Heard. Considered.
The landlords have sought eviction of the tenant on the
grounds of default in payment of rent, non-user of the rented
premise as well as reasonable & bonafide necessity of the suit
premise for their sister-Smt. Pushpa. While the ground of default
in payment did not find favour with the learned Rent Tribunal, the
recovery certificate was issued on the grounds of non-user and
reasonable & bonafide necessity. These findings of facts have been
affirmed by the learned Appellate Rent Tribunal vide its judgment
dated 17.11.2023 re-appreciating the evidence on record.
Learned counsel for the tenant could not point out any
perversity or jurisdictional error in the concurrent findings of facts
recorded by the learned Appellate Rent Tribunal and the learned
Rent Tribunal so as to warrant interference of this Court under
Article 227 of the Constitution of India.
Contention of the learned counsel for the tenant that the
reasonable & bonafide necessity stands extinguished on account of
death of Smt. Pushpa is found to be wholly misconceived and
frivolous. There is nothing on record to suggest that Smt. Pushpa
[2024:RJ-JP:7651] (3 of 3) [CW-1833/2024]
had expired during pendency of the proceedings. Despite
opportunity, the learned counsel also could not substantiate his
submission that Smt. Pushpa has expired during pendency of the
proceeding. Learned counsel for the tenant also admits that in
execution of recovery certificate, the suit premises have already
been vacated.
In view thereof, this civil writ petition is found to be wholly
misconceived and frivolous and is dismissed with cost of ₹5,000/-
which shall be deposited by the tenant with the Litigants Welfare
Fund within a period of four weeks from today.
(MAHENDAR KUMAR GOYAL),J
Manish/126
Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)
