AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
No AI summary yet
Generate an eight-section analysis of this judgment — facts, issues, reasoning, ratio and a plain-language gist.
Judgment
26 paragraphs · 299 wordsThis petition has been filed seeking a direction that suit
No.241/2007, Naresh Kumar Sukhlecha Vs. Shri Kushal Chand Bardiya,
filed by the petitioner before the Rent Tribunal, Jaipur City under the
provisions of Rent Control Act, 2001 (hereinafter `2001 Act'').
Counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner applicant-
landlord filed eviction application under Section 9 of the 2001 Act in
December, 2007. After service, counsel for the non applicant appeared and
filed reply. 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.
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 four 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.
The writ petition stands allowed accordingly.
