SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2013 Supreme(Raj) 2047

GOPAL KRISHAN VYAS
Vinod Kumar Sharma – Appellant
Versus
Fakruddin – Respondent


For the Petitioner:P.S. Bhati, Nupur Bhati, Advocates.
For the Respondent: None.

JUDGMENT

1. - Heard learned Counsel for the petitioner.

2. In this writ petition, the petitioner is challenging the validity of the order dated 5.11.2011 whereby the prayer of the petitioner for deciding the preliminary issue is rejected by the Rent Tribunal. Learned Counsel for the petitioner submits that it is the duty of the Rent Tribunal to first decide the question whether the petitioner is tenant of the non-applicant or not and, after deciding the said issue, the Trial Court is required to proceed in the matter.

3. After hearing learned Counsel for the petitioner, I have perused Section 21 of the Rajasthan Rent Control Act, 2001, which reads as under:

"21. Procedure and powers of the Rent Tribunal and the Appellate Rent Tribunal.-

(1) in every case before the Rent Tribunal and the Appellate Rent Tribunal the evidence of a witness shall be given by affidavit. However, the Rent Tribunal or the Appellate Rent Tribunal, where it appears to it that it is necessary in the interest of justice to call a witness for examination or cross-examination and such witness can be produced, may order attendance for examination or cross-examination of such a witness.

(2) The documents filed before t
















Click Here to Read the rest of this document

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top