Digitally 2025:CGHC:59894-DB signed by NAFR SHAYNA KADRI HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WP227 No. 1242 of 2025

1 - Janki Bai W/o Late Harinarayan @ Hari Ram Dhruv Aged About 60 Years R/o Ward No. 49 Shyam Nagar Telibandha, Raipur District Raipur Chhattisgarh

2 - Mithlesh Kumar Dhruv S/o Late Harinarayan @ Hari Ram Dhruv Aged About 41 Years R/o Ward No. 49 Shyam Nagar Telibandha, Raipur District Raipur Chhattisgarh

3 - Kamlesh Kumar Dhruv S/o Late Harinarayan @ Hari Ram Dhruv Aged About 33 Years R/o Ward No. 49 Shyam Nagar Telibandha, Raipur District Raipur Chhattisgarh

4 - Yogesh Kumar Dhruv S/o Late Harinarayan @ Hari Ram Dhruv Aged About 28 Years R/o Ward No. 49 Shyam Nagar Telibandha, Raipur District Raipur Chhattisgarh ... Petitioner(s)

versus

1 - Sunil Kumar Natthani S/o Late Sohan Lal Natthani Aged About 55 Years R/o Sadar Bazar, Raipur District Raipur Chhattisgarh ... Respondent(s)

(Cause-title is taken from Case Information System)

For Petitioner : Mr. F. S. Khare, Advocate For Respondent : Mr. Shalvik Tiwari, Advocate (Division Bench)

Hon’ble Smt. Justice Rajani Dubey Hon'ble Shri Justice Amitendra Kishore Prasad

Order on Board

Per; Rajani Dubey, Judge

10/12/2025

1. This petition has been filed against the impugned order dated

04.11.2025 (Annexure P/1) passed by the Chhattisgarh Rent Control Tribunal, Raipur, in M.J.C. No. 02/2025, whereby the Tribunal has rejected the petitioner’s application filed under Section 10(च) of the Chhattisgarh Rent Control Act on the ground of limitation. The petitioner has prayed for following reliefs:

“10.1 That this Hon'ble court may kindly be pleased to quash/set- aside the impugned order dated 04.11.2025 Annexure P/1 and may kindly be please to allow the application Under section 5 of Limitation Act and be please to direct the learned C.G. Rent Control tribunal Raipur to decide the M.J.C. No.

02/2025 in accordance with law.

10.2 This Hon'ble court may kindly be call for the records for its kind perusal which relates to petitioner's matter.

10.3 Any other relief, which this Hon'ble Court may deem fit and proper, may also be passed in favour of the petitioner.”

2. Facts of the case, as projected in this petition, are that the respondent is the recorded owner of Khasra No. 126, admeasuring 0.90 decimal, situated near Canal Linking Road, Shyam Nagar, Raipur. Out of the said land, an area of 2400 sq. ft. was given on rent to one Harinarayan @ Hariram Dhruv, the husband of petitioner No.1 and father of petitioners No.2 to 4, on an annual rent of Rs. 3,000/-. According to the respondent, a notice dated 01.06.2016 was issued to the said tenant directing him to vacate the premises on or before 30.11.2016. However, the tenant neither vacated the premises within the stipulated time nor paid rent for a period of three years. Consequently, the respondent instituted proceedings before the Rent Control Authority, Raipur. It is the respondent’s case that all notices were duly served on the tenant, but as he failed to appear, he was declared ex parte, and vide order dated 31.01.2018 (Annexure P/2), the Authority allowed the respondent’s case. Aggrieved by the ex parte order, Harinarayan @ Hariram Dhruv preferred an appeal before the Chhattisgarh Rent Control Tribunal, Raipur, along with an application under Section 13(1) of the Chhattisgarh Rent Control Act and Section 10 CPC, contending that the notices were never served upon him and, therefore, the ex parte order dated 31.01.2018 deserved to be set aside. The appeal and accompanying applications (Annexure P/3) were registered and taken up for hearing. During the pendency of the appeal, the appellant Harinarayan @ Hariram Dhruv passed away on 26.03.2021, and as no legal representative appeared thereafter, the Tribunal dismissed the appeal for want of prosecution vide order dated 26.07.2021 (Annexure P/4). The petitioners later filed an application for setting aside the order dated 26.07.2021, asserting that due to the Covid-19 lockdown, they had no informati