Back
HIGH COURT OF RAJASTHAN (JAIPUR BENCH)
MAHENDAR KUMAR GOYAL, J
Surajeet Singh Boran – Appellant
Versus
Yaseen And Ors – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
(MAHENDAR KUMAR GOYAL, J.)
This writ petition, filed under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, is directed against the judgment dated 16.03.2013 passed by the learned Appellate Rent Tribunal, Sikar (for brevity, "learned Appellate Rent Tribunal") in rent appeal No.37/2009 whereby, the appeal preferred by the petitioner/non- applicant/tenant (for short, "tenant") against the final order dated 12.04.2007 passed by the learned Rent Tribunal, Sikar (for short, "the learned Rent Tribunal"), allowing an application filed by the respondent No.1/applicant/landlord (for short, "landlord") under Section 9 of theRajasthan Rent Control Act, 2001 (for brevity, "the Act of 2001"), has been dismissed.
2. The relevant facts in brief are that the landlord filed an application under Sections 6 and 9 of the Act of 2001 against the tenant in the learned Rent Tribunal. Vide its order dated 21.03.2006, learned Rent Tribunal passed an order qua prayer of the landlord for revision of the rent under Section 6 of the Act of 2001 whereupon, the landlord filed an application under Section 21(3)(c) for reviewing the order dated 21.03.2006. Despite service, tenant did not put in appearance. Realiz
The court upheld the dismissal of the tenant's appeal due to negligence and failure to provide a sufficient explanation for the delay in filing, emphasizing that the law aids the vigilant.
The Appellate Rent Tribunal can only take evidence in exceptional circumstances and cannot usurp the jurisdiction of the Rent Tribunal.
The appellate court has the discretion to frame additional issues and record additional evidence under Order 41 Rule 25 and Rule 28 of the Code of Civil Procedure.
Where there has been an appeal against a decree passed ex-parte under this rule, and the appeal has been disposed of on any ground other than the ground that the appellant has withdrawn appeal, no ap....
The court ruled that while procedural provisions may be directory, a party must substantiate claims of hardship to justify delays in legal proceedings.
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.
A justice-oriented approach must be adopted in condoning delays, focusing on 'sufficient cause' rather than hyper-technical grounds.
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
