JUDGMENT :

(Pushpendra Singh Bhati, J.)

This writ petition has been preferred claiming the following reliefs:

"It is therefore prayed that this writ petition may kindly be allowed with cost and by an appropriate writ, order or direction -

a. That the impugned judgment dated 13.10.2022 passed by the learned Rent Appellate Tribunal, Pali (Raj.) in Rent Appeal no.4/2013 and the judgment dated 08.01.2013 passed by the learned Rent Control Tribunal, Pali (Raj.) in Rent Control Case no.18/2008 may kindly be declared illegal and set aside with all consequential benefits.

b. That in the alternative it is also prayed that, if during the pendency of this writ petition, the petitioner is dispossessed from the presmises in question, then his possession may kindly be restored back with all consequential benefits.

c. That any other relief which this Hon'ble Court deems fit and proper in the facts and circumstances of the case, may kindly be granted in favour of the petitioner."

2. Brief facts of the case, as placed before this Court by learned counsel for the petitioner, are that one Sh. Kewal Chand (since deceased, now represented through LR - respondent no.1/1 herein) filed an application under Sections 6 , 9 and 10 of the RAJASTHAN RENT CONTROL ACT , 2001 (hereinafter referred as 'Act of 2001'), registered as Rent Control Case No.18/2008, before the learned Rent Tribunal, Pali against the petitioner, stating therein that he let out the premises in question to the petitioner on rent @ Rs. 400/- per month w.e.f. 26.04.1994, and the rent deed was executed on 24.03.1994.

2.1. Thereafter, the original applicant (landlord) sent a registered notice through his Advocate on 12.05.2008 and terminated the landlord-tenant relationship with the petitioner, and also asked the petitioner to deposit the due rent of three years to be paid by the petitioner; however, during the pendency of the eviction application, the original landlord - Kewal Chand expired, and accordingly, his legal representative (respondent no.1/1 herein) was taken on record on 30.01.2021.

2.2. The learned Rent Tribunal framed the issues and proceeded with the trial; after hearing of the parties, the learned Rent Tribunal below vide the impugned order dated 08.01.2013, allowed the said application and directed to the petitioner to vacate the premises in question and pay the due rent.

2.3. The petitioner has preferred an appeal under Section 19(6) of the Act of 2001 (registered as Rent Appeal No. 04/2023) against the aforesaid order dated 08.01.2013, before the learned Appellate Rent Tribunal, Pali. The learned Appellate Tribunal vide the impugned order dated 13.10.2022 dismissed the said appeal, while upholding the order dated 08.01.2013 passed by the learned Rent Tribunal. Thus, the present petition has been preferred by the petitioner claiming the afore-quoted reliefs.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner himself is the owner of the premises in question, as he has a patta in respect of the property in question issued by the competent authority. Therefore, as per learned counsel, the orders passed by the learned Tribunals below are not justified in law.

3.1. Learned counsel further submitted that the patta clearly show that the petitioner was in possession of the premises in question since 1990, and the Municipal Council, Pali issued the requisite patta to the petitioner on 03.12.2012, Therefore, as per learned counsel, the orders passed by the learned Tribunal below cannot be sustained in the eye of law.

3.