Back
HIGH COURT OF RAJASTHAN (JODHPUR BENCH)
Dr. Justice Nupur Bhati, J
PAPPU RAM DHOBI – Appellant
Versus
ASHOK KUMAR S/O LATE RAM KUMAR – Respondent
Order :
1. The present writ petition has been filed under Article 227 of the Constitution of India with the following prayer :-
“It is, therefore humbly and respectfully prayed that this writ petition of the petitioner may kindly be allowed and by an appropriate writ, order or direction the impugned order dated 06.09.2024 (Annexure-6) passed by learned Civil Judge, Sujangarh, District Churu (Raj.) in Civil Original Suit No.03/2008 (289/2010) (CO 224/2014) titled as Ashok Kumar Vs. Ratanlal may kindly be quashed and set aside.”
2. Brief facts of the case are that the respondent No. 1 filed a suit before learned Civil Judge (J.D.) No. 1, Sujangarh, District Churu seeking a decree of eviction of rented shop and for payment of mesne profit and other expenses against the defendant-Shri Ratan Lal (father of the present petitioner). After service of notices, the defendant submitted his written statement to the suit denying the averments of the suit. During the pendency of suit, father of the petitioner expired on 16.01.2020 and on 04.03.2022 respondent No. 1 presented an application under Order 22 Rule 4 C.P.C. for impleading petitioner as defendant No. 1/2 and proforma respondents No. 2 to
Delay in seeking amendment of pleadings post-defendant's death was unjustified, highlighting the need for diligence in civil proceedings.
The new Rent Control Act does not apply retrospectively to pending suits, and jurisdiction is determined by the law in effect at the time of filing.
Ownership issues cannot be determined in eviction suits, and certified copies of public documents are admissible in evidence.
Ownership issues cannot be adjudicated in eviction suits; certified copies of public documents are admissible as evidence.
Legal representatives of a deceased landlord can amend eviction applications to include their necessity, avoiding multiplicity of proceedings, provided no injustice is caused to the other party.
Point of Law : Tenant fails to furnish undertaking to above effect, respondent-landlady would be entitled to get judgment/decree of eviction executed forthwith in accordance with law.
The amendment sought under Order 6 Rule 17 CPC should be allowed only if the facts were not within the petitioner's knowledge prior to filing the reply.
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
