SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2026 Supreme(Online)(Chh) 1321

IN THE HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR
DR. BADRI PRASAD JAISWAL – Appellant
Versus
KAMAL KUMAR MAKHEEJA – Respondent
WPC/2486/2025



2026:CGHC:6815-DB Digitally signed by RAVVA UTTEJ KUMAR RAJU NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR The date when The date when The date when the the judgment is the judgment is judgment is uploaded on reserved pronounced the website Operative Full

28.11.2025 06. 02.2026 -- 06.02.2026 WPC No. 2486 of 2025 Dr. Badri Prasad Jaiswal S/o Late Ganesh Prasad Jaiswal, aged about 74 years (wrongly mentioned as 66 years) R/o Normal School (Old High Court) Road, In front of Bihari Takiz, Bilaspur, Tehsil & District Bilaspur (C.G.)

... Petitioner Versus

1 - Kamal Kumar Makheeja S/o Vashudev Makhija, aged about 39 years, R/o Old High Court Road, beside Ganga Shri Takiz, Gandhi Chowk, Bilaspur, Tehsil and District - Bilaspur (C.G.).

2 - Chhattisgarh Rent Control Tribunal, through Registrar, C.G. Rent Control Tribunal, Old R.D.A. Building, first floor, Shastri chowk, Raipur, (C.G.).

3 - The Rent Controlling Authority, District, Bilaspur, Near Collectorate Bilaspur, (C.G.). ... Respondents (Cause title is taken from Case Information System Software)

For Petitioner : Mr. Neeraj Choubey, Advocate.

For Respondent No. 1 : Mr. H.S. Ahluwalia, Advocate along with Ms.

Durga Mehar, Advocate.

Hon'ble Smt Justice Rajani Dubey, J.

Hon’ble Shri Justice Amitendra Kishore Prasad, J.

C A V Order

Per , Rajani Dubey , Judge

1. The petitioner (landlord) has filed the instant writ petition under Article 226/227 of the Constitution of India against the order dated 17.03.2025 passed by the Chhattisgarh Rent Control Tribunal, Raipur (henceforth ‘the Tribunal) in appeal No. 15-A/2024 whereby the learned Tribunal has allowed the appeal of the respondent No. 1/ non-applicant (tenant) and set aside the order dated 13.02.2024 passed by the Rent Control Authority (henceforth ‘the Authority’)/ Sub Divisional Officer (Revenue) by which the Authority has passed the order with regard to eviction of the respondent and further directed to make payment of remaining arrears of rent to the petitioner.

2. Hence, this petition filed by the petitioner seeking for following relief(s):

A. That, the Hon'ble High Court may kindly be pleased to issue the suitable writ petition/order(s)/ direction(s) in favour of the petitioner and quash, set-aside the impugned order dated 17.03.2025 passed by the learned tribunal in the appeal No. 15-A/2024 (Annexure -P/1) and restore/conformed the order passed by the rent control authority.

B. That, this Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to issue an appropriate writ, order and protect the legal right of the senior citizen for filing of the fresh application, otherwise the provision of the CG rent control act 2011 would be frustrated. And further direct the respondent/tenant to immediately vacate the shop of the petitioner.

C. Any other relief(s), which this Hon'ble Court may think fit and proper in the facts and circumstances of the case, with cost of the petition, may also please be granted to the petitioner.

3. Brief facts of the case as adumbrated by the petitioner are that the petitioner is the senior citizen person, aged about 74 years, residing at Normal School (Old High Court) Road, in front of Bihari Takiz, Bilaspur, Tehsil & District-Bilaspur (C.G.) and he is a doctor by profession. The petitioner is the owner of the questioned shop situated at Old High Court Road, beside Ganga Shri Takiz, Gandhi Chowk, Bilaspur for which one rent agreement for 11 months period was executed between the parties on 20.03.2016 and after ending of the said period, no any other rent agreement was executed between the parties. The petitioner requires the subject shop for personal use, specifically to operate a medical clinic near his home, due to his advanced age and associated health considerations. Furthermore, because the shop is old, the petitioner requires it to be renovated. In view of his personal need, the petitioner requested the respondent No. 1/tenant to vacate the shop, however, the respondent No. 1/tenant has avoided the petitioner's requests and, since July 20

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

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

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top