Back
MAHENDAR KUMAR GOYAL
Gulabi – Appellant
Versus
Ashok Kumar – Respondent
ORDER :
Mr. Mahendar Kumar Goyal, J. - This writ petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India has been filed assailing the legality and validity of the judgment dated 26.09.2015 passed by learned Appellate Rent Tribunal, Ajmer (for brevity, "the learned Appellate Tribunal") whereby, while dismissing the Rent Appeal No.16/2014 preferred by the petitioners/non-applicants/tenants (for brevity, "tenants"), the final order dated 30.05.2014 passed by learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Rent Tribunal, Ajmer (for brevity, "the learned Rent Tribunal") allowing the original application No.822/2012 (168/2011) filed by the respondent/applicant/landlord (for brevity, "the landlord") under Sections 6 and 9 of the Rajasthan Rent Control Act, 2001, (for brevity," the Act of 2001"), has been upheld.
2. The relevant facts in brief are that the landlord filed an application against the tenants seeking revision of rent and their eviction stating therein that the subject premises, comprising of a shop situated on ground floor of the property No.533/25 Ashagunj, Ajmer, was let out to Shri Naurat-husband of the tenant No.2 and father of the tenant No.1 on 10.12.2008 on rent @ Rs. 650/-
Tenants can be evicted for using premises inconsistently with tenancy purpose, supported by sufficient evidence from the landlord.
The burden of proof in establishing default in payment of rent lies with the landlord, and the landlord must discharge the initial burden of proof.
The court upheld the concurrent findings of fact regarding the tenant's subletting of premises, affirming the dismissal of the writ petition under limited supervisory jurisdiction.
The Appellate Rent Tribunal can only take evidence in exceptional circumstances and cannot usurp the jurisdiction of the Rent Tribunal.
The court emphasized the importance of upholding findings of fact arrived at by the lower tribunals and the landlord's right to choose the best place for doing business.
The court affirmed that eviction under Section 9(i) of the Rajasthan Rent Control Act does not require prior notice for arrears of rent, focusing on bonafide necessity.
The main legal point established in the judgment is that the Rent Tribunal has jurisdiction to decide eviction applications under the Act of 2001, despite the existence of an arbitration clause in th....
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
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
