The court established that disputes between landlords and tenants must be resolved by the Rent Tribunal, not civil courts, as per Section 18 of the Rajasthan Rent Control Act, 2001.

Judgment

1. In both revision petitions, challenge has been made to the Order dated 21.01.2020 passed in Civil Suit No.34/485/2014 by the Court of Additional Civil Judge and Metropolitan Magistrate No.2, Jaipur Metropolitan, Jaipur, hence with consent of learned counsel for both parties, both revision petitions have been heard together and would stand decide by this common judgment.

2. Heard learned counsel for both parties, perused the impugned order and record made available before this Court.

3. This is a case where plaintiff Raghuveer Singh alleges himself to be a tenant in one room, kitchen and lath-bath situated in house No.36-A, Krishna Vihar Extension, Gopalpura Bypass, Jaipur, w.e.f. 01.01.2008 @ Rs.1700/- per month and which increased to Rs.2000/- per month. Plaintiff alleged his dispossession from rented premises illegally by defendant-landlord on 03.06.2014 and has instituted a civil suit for restoration of possession before the Civil Court on 20.11.2014, taking resort to Section 6 of the Specific Relief Act, 1963 (hereinafter referred as "the Act of 1963").

4. Defendant-landlord does not dispute the relationship of landlord and tenant between parties and has moved application under Order 7 Rule 11 CPC, raising following two objections:

(I) The jurisdiction of Civil Court to entertain civil suit for restoration of possession filed by tenant is expressly barred by virtue of Section 18 of the Rajasthan Rent Control Act, 2001, and remedy to the tenant, if illegally dispossessed, is envisaged under Sections 11 & 12 of Rajasthan Rent Control Act, 2001, itself.

(II) Plaintiff has not valued the civil suit properly and the court fees paid, is insufficient.

5. Plaintiff has filed reply to the application but nothing has been said about the remedy available to plaintiff-tenant under Sections 11 & 12 of the Rajasthan Rent Control Act, 2001 (hereinafter referred as "the Act of 2001"), if he was aggrieved by his illegal dispossession from the rented premises on 03.06.2014. The plaintiff-tenant has simply replied that since he has instituted the civil suit invoking provisions of Section 6 of the Act of 1963, the Civil Court has a jurisdiction to try the suit. In respect of court fees, plaintiff has replied that the civil suit has properly been valued and sufficient court fees has been paid.

6. Learned trial court, after hearing counsel for both parties, decided the application under Order 7 Rule 11 CPC vide order impugned dated 21.01.2020. The trial court has dismissed the application under Order 7 Rule 11 CPC for rejection of the plaint, on the ground of having no jurisdiction to try the present suit by the Civil Court in view of Section 18 of the Act of 2001, but has accepted the application partially, directing plaintiff to make valuation of plaint as per market value of the suit property and to pay court fees accordingly, as per provisions of Section 29 of the Rajasthan Court Fees and Suits Valuation Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred as "the Act of 1961").

7. Defendant has challenged the impugned order dated 21.01.2020, by way of filing S.B. Civil Revision Petition No.67/2020 to the extent of not rejecting the civil suit before the Civil Court, despite of clear bar under Section 18 of the Act of 2001, and plaintiff has challenged the impugned order dated 21.01.2020, in respect of directing him to make the valuation of suit as per market value and to pay court fees accordingly, by way of filing S.B. Civil Revision Petition No. 25/2020.

8. Learned counsel for petitioner-defendant, Sh. Rajesh Maharishi, has strenuously urged that as per pleadings of plaint, it is an admitted position that plaintiff has filed the present civil suit for restoration of possession of the tenanted property, alleging his status as tenant. Learned counsel has pointed out that the suit property is situated in Jaipur City, where provisions of the Act of 2001, have been made operative w.e.f. 01.04.2003, when the Act of 2001 received assent of the President and after