1. - This petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India impugns the judgment dated 8.10.2013 passed by the Appellate Rent Tribunal, Ajmer affirming the judgment dated 21.12.2011 passed by the Rent Tribunal, Ajmer allowing the respondent applicant's (hereinafter 'the applicant') application under section 9 of the Rajasthan Rent Control Act, 2001 (hereinafter 'the Act of 2001') and directing the petitioner non-applicant's (hereinafter 'the non-applicant') eviction from the leased premises six months following the judgment. Consequences of not handing over possession to the applicant thereafter have also been set out in the Rent Tribunal's Judgment.

2. An application was filed under section 9 of the Act of 2001 for eviction of the non-applicant from the leased premises described in para No.2 thereof. It was stated that the premises in issue were leased to the predecessor in interest of the non-applicant the Caltex (India) Limited under a registered lease deed dated 15.10.1967 effective 1.2.1968 for a period of 20 years and could be renewed at the option of the lessee exercised prior to the expiry of the lease for two periods of ten years each under Clause 3(g) of the said lease deed which read as under:

"The lessee may by giving ninety days' notice in writing upto the Lessor and causing the same to be delivered either by registered post or leaving the same at the last known place of residence of the Lessor determine this lease before the expiry of the term hereby granted. Upon expiry of the period of notice the lease shall determine without prejudice however to any claim by either of the parties against the other in respect of any antecedent breach of a covenant or a condition herein contained."

3. It was submitted that thereafter the Caltex (Acquisition of shares of Caltex Oil Refining (India) Limited and of the Undertakings in India of Caltex (India) Ltd.) Act, 1977 (hereinafter 'the Act of 1977') was enacted resulting in the non-applicant succeeding to the lease hold rights under the lease deed dated 15.10.1967. The lease after expiry of 20 years was not renewed as per contract by way of an appropriate renewal deed drawn and registered. But the Act of 1977 provided for a statutory renewal of the lease deed under section 7(3) thereof which provided that "on the expiry of the term of any lease, tenancy or arrangement referred to in sub-section (1) or subsection (2), such lease or tenancy or arrangement shall, if so desired by the Central Government, be renewed or continued, so far as may be, on the same terms and conditions on which the lease or tenancy or arrangement was originally granted or entered into." The nonapplicant- leasee continued in possession and use of the leased premises even after the original lease period on 31.1.1988. It was stated that the possession of the non-applicant over the leased property subsequent to 1.2.1988 was thus relatable to the statutory renewal under section 7 (3) of the Act of 1977 for a period of 20 years i.e till 31.1.2008 as the original lease period under the lease deed dated 15.10.1967 was also 20 years. In the circumstances vide notice dated 7.9.2007 the applicant informed the non-applicant that the term of its lease was ending 1.2.2008 consequent to which the vacant possession of the leased property be handed over failing which the non-applicant alone would be liable for the consequences and costs of any legal proceedings taken for obtaining vacant possession of the leased premises.

4. It was stated that the letter dated 22.9.2007 then addressed by the non-applicant to the applicant sought to invoke section 7(3) of the Act of 1977 claiming a statutory right to a renewal of lease effective 1.2.2008 for a period of 20 years till 31.1.2028. But this was wholly without legal foundation, mala fide and actuated by oblique purposes. It was stated that the purpose of section 7 of the Act of 1977 was to safeguard the immediate commercial interests of the Government which had acq