An eviction order can proceed to execution unless stayed or set aside, despite pending review questioning its validity.

Per Rajni Dubey, Judge

24/07/2025

1) The respondent filed an application under Section 23 of the Chhattisgarh Accommodation Control Act , 1961, alleging that he Digitally signed had let out a shop to the Petitioner in 1972, and that rent had not by SHAYNA KADRI been paid since December 2012, resulting in arrears of ₹48,300/-, and therefore sought eviction. The Petitioner opposed the application, asserting that he had purchased the shop from the respondent on 13.12.1993 and that a civil suit for declaration of title is pending before the trial Court. It was also stated that the shop had been destroyed in a fire on 15.11.1993 during Diwali, and was reconstructed by the petitioner. Despite this, the Rent Controlling Authority allowed the application and passed an eviction order. On appeal, the Appellate Tribunal held that the application under Section 23 was not maintainable and dismissed the appeal on 27.06.2024. Thereafter, the respondent initiated execution proceedings on the basis of the said order. The petitioner filed a review application along with a prayer for stay of execution, which was summarily rejected by the Tribunal without due consideration, fixing a later date for hearing on the review. Aggrieved by which, petitioner has filed this petition seeking following reliefs :

“10.1 It is therefore prayed that this Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to set aside the order dated 20.12.2024 passed by Chhattisgarh Rent Control Tribunal, Raipur in MJC no. 14/2024.

10.2 It is therefore prayed that this Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased t issue an appropriate writ or order and quash the execution proceeding Revenue case no. 202408050100004/2023-24 pending before R control Authority, Korba [C.G.] between Ajay Kumar Thawait Vs Pra L Jesrani.”

2) Facts of the case, in a nutshell, are that the present petition is filed in order to seek protection from an illegal and non-maintainable eviction order that is under execution. The petitioner was arrayed as the non-Applicant/tenant, and the respondent as the applicant/landlord before the learned Rent Control Authority, Korba [C.G.]. Accordingly, the status of the parties as Tenant (Petitioner) and Landlord (Respondent) is being maintained for the purpose of this petition. The respondent filed an application under Section 23 of the Chhattisgarh Accommodation Control Act , 1961 read with the Rules of 1966, alleging that he had rented out a non-residential two-floor commercial shop (measuring 14' x 57', 798 sq. ft.), located at Ward No. 10, in front of Bunti Stores, Korba Main Road, District Korba [C.G.], to one Govind Ram Prahlad Rai Jerwani in the year 1972. It was further alleged that the Petitioner had not paid rent since December 2012, and a sum of ₹48,300/- was due. On this basis, eviction was sought. The Petitioner categorically denied the averments made in the eviction application and asserted that he had purchased the suit shop from the respondent on 13.12.1993. He further stated that the shop was destroyed in a fire incident during Diwali on 15.11.1993 and was subsequently reconstructed by him at his own cost. The petitioner has also filed a civil suit for declaration of title, which is currently pending before the competent trial Court. These facts were brought to the notice of the Rent Control Authority. Despite the objections raised by petitioner and the pendency of the title suit, the learned Rent Control Authority, Korba, vide order dated 25.09.2023, allowed the eviction application. The Authority, relying on an alleged admission by the petitioner regarding tenancy, held that he was a tenant under Babulal (the respondent) and accordingly direc