High CourtsSINGLE BENCH(2017) 05 RAJ CK 0101

Mohan Lal Verma vs Rajendra Prasad Shah son of Heera Lal Shah

Rajasthan High Court · Decided on 22 May 2017

HON’BLE JUDGES
Alok Sharma
RESULT
Allowed
CASE NUMBER
7059 of 2017

AI Structured Summary

Not yet generated for this judgment

Judgment

28 paragraphs · 311 words
1.

This petition has been filed with the prayer to direct the Rent

Tribunal Jaipur Metropolitan, Jaipur to decide at an early date the eviction

application No.1028/2005 (1/2013), titled Mohan Lal Verma & Others Vs.

Rajendrra Prasad Shah filed under the provisions of Rent Control Act,

2001 (hereinafter `2001 Act'').

2.

Counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner applicant-

landlord filed eviction application under Section 9 of the 2001 Act on 8-

11-2005. After service, counsel for the non applicant appeared and filed

reply on 4-1-2006. Thereafter the case is still pending. Counsel submitted

that Section 15(5) of the 2001 Act provides for disposal of eviction

application within 240 days from service of notice on opposite party.

Reference has been made to Section 21(4) of the 2001 Act which provides

that adjournment by the Rent Tribunal can be granted only on an

application in writing therefor decided by a reasoned order. Yet

adjournments are granted on the mere askance. And the non-applicant-

tenant resorts to frivolous applications to stall the progress in the eviction

petition.

3.

Having heard learned counsel for the petitioner, and perused the

material available on record as also the provisions of the 2001 Act, I find

that the prayer sought for is reasonable. The Rent Tribunal is directed to

expeditiously decide the application filed by the petitioner and in any

event not later than three months from the date of receipt of the certified

copy of this order. In the process, the provisions of Section 21(4) of the

2001 Act be adhered to. It is further directed that in the event of filing of

frivolous application the same be decided on the same day or the following

day by a reasoned and speaking order, and when necessary cost be also

imposed as a measure of regulation of court proceedings.

4.

The writ petition stands allowed accordingly.