[2025:RJ-JP:49032]

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN

BENCH AT JAIPUR

S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 18692/2025

1. Brajmohan S/o Kishanlal, Aged About 63 Years, R/o

Behind Panchayat Bhawan, Mahukalan, Tehsil Gangapur

City, District Sawaimadhopur.

2. Satish Raj S/o Brajmohan, Aged About 39 Years, R/o

Behind Panchayat Bhawan, Mahukalan, Tehsil Gangapur

City, District Sawaimadhopur.

----Petitioners

Versus

Arihant Kumar Jain S/o Gulab Chand Jain, R/o Kachari Road, Gangapur City, Tehsil Gangapurcity, District Sawaimadhopur

Rajasthan.

----Respondent

For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Pushpendra Kumar Pandey

For Respondent(s) :

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE BIPIN GUPTA

Order

03/12/2025

1. The present writ petition has been filed, assailing the order dated 13.11.2025, whereby the learned Rent Appellate Tribunal has rejected the application of the petitioner-tenant for staying the execution of the decree on the ground, no execution has been

filed for recovery of possession.

2. Brief facts of the case are that on 30.01.2018, the respondent filed an application under Section 6 & 9 of the Rajasthan Rent Control Act, seeking eviction of the petitioner from the shop and revision of rent. The learned Rent Tribunal framed issues and after hearing both the parties, the learned Rent

Tribunal decreed the eviction petition on 09.04.2025.

3. Aggrieved the order dated 09.04.2025 petitioner filed an appeal before the learned Rent Appellate Tribunal. During the pending appeal, the respondent filed an execution application. On filing of execution application, the petitioner moved an application for stay of the impugned decree dated 09.04.2025. The learned Rent Appellate Tribunal, after hearing the arguments, rejected the application on the ground that the execution application was for recovery of rent and not for possession.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the impugned order is illegal and arbitrary. He further contends that the learned Rent Appellate Tribunal has erred in rejecting the application. Further, he submits that if the decree is executed then the appeal will be rendered infructuous. He, therefore, prays that impugned order dated 13.11.2025, may be quashed & set aside and execution & operation of the impugned order dated 09.04.2025, may be stayed till final disposal of the appeal pending before the learned Rent Appellate Tribunal.

5. On the perusal of the impugned order dated 13.11.2025 and material available on record. This Court finds that the execution has been preferred for recovery of rent, not for possession. The tenant is obliged to pay the arrears of rent even if the appeal is pending. Therefore, no error has been committed by the learned Rent Appellate Tribunal, so as to call for any interference by this Hon’ble Court.

6. However, if any execution for possession is filed by the respondent, then the petitioner will be at liberty, to file a fresh stay application before the learned Rent Appellate Tribunal.

7. With the above observations, the present Civil Writ Petition stands disposed of.

8. All pending application(s), if any, also stand disposed of.

(BIPIN GUPTA),J MAHIMA/1 Powerd by TCPDF (w.tcpdf.org)