[2026:RJ-JP:7177]

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 18448/2019 Rasheed Mohammed Qureshi S/o Late Shri Shafi Mohammed, Aged About 42 Years, R/o House No. 563, Near Nadro Ki Masjid, Chini Ki Burj, Chowkdi Sarhad, Jaipur.

----Petitioner/Plaintiff Versus

1. Anil Dhamela S/o Late Shri Hukumchand Dhamela, Aged About 48 Years, R/o Shop No. 307, Indra Bazar, Jaipur And Residential Address 684, Frontier Colony, Adarsh Nagar, Jaipur.

2. Ajay Dhamela S/o Late Shri Hukumchand Dhamela, Aged About 46 Years, R/o Shop No. 307, Indra Bazar, Jaipur And Residential Address 684, Frontier Colony, Adarsh Nagar, Jaipur.

----Respondents/Defendants For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Naqvi Sehban Najib Sabiha with Mr. Sahil Khan, Ms. Rabiya Mateen, Ms. Garima Gothwal For Respondent(s) : None Present HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE BIPIN GUPTA

Judgment / Order

1. The present civil writ petition has been filed assailing the order dated 23.07.2019, passed by the learned Appellate Rent Tribunal, Jaipur, in Civil Appeal No. 113/2017, whereby the Appellate Rent Tribunal (hereinafter referred to as “Appellate Tribunal”) while allowing the appeal preferred by the respondents–

tenants, consequently, quashed and set aside the order dated 03.06.2017, passed by the learned Rent Tribunal, Jaipur (Additional Senior Civil Judge and Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate No. 1, Jaipur Metropolitan, Jaipur), in Application No.369/2014, wherein the learned Rent Tribunal had allowed the eviction application filed by the petitioner–landlord under Section 9 of the Rajasthan Rent Control Act, 2001 (hereinafter referred to as “the Act of 2001”).

2. The brief facts, as pleaded, are that the petitioner–landlord instituted an application under Section 9 of the Act of 2001, inter alia contending that the shop in dispute had been let out to the respondents–tenants by the petitioner’s father on 12.09.1997 at a monthly rent of Rs. 600/- excluding electricity charges. It was averred that Shafi Mohammed and his wife, Smt. Shakko Begam, had expired some time ago. Upon their demise, when the petitioner demanded payment of rent from the respondents, the same was refused. Consequently, a legal notice dated 20.03.2014 was issued to the respondents intimating the petitioner’s bank account details and calling upon them to deposit the arrears of rent amounting to Rs. 34,800/-. Pursuant to the said notice, the respondents deposited the rent amount.

3. The petitioner–landlord further submitted that he has been carrying on the business of a Photo Colour Lab since 05.11.2001 from a rented premises situated at Raisar Plaza. He also stated that with effect from 07.05.2013, he had taken another shop on rent from one Inder Singh Verma, bearing Shop No. 1668, Baba Harish Chandra Marg, Jaipur, wherein he conducts the business of album making. It was specifically pleaded that both the aforesaid premises are tenanted accommodations and are not owned by the petitioner-landlord.

4. It was further contended that the initial rent of the Raisar Plaza shop was Rs. 9,000/- per month, which has subsequently been enhanced to Rs. 19,215/- per month, rendering it financially burdensome and beyond the petitioner’s capacity to sustain. Being the owner of the shop in dispute and asserting his bona fide requirement thereof, the petitioner–landlord sought eviction of the respondents–tenants to enable him to conduct his Photo Colour Lab business from the disputed premises.

5. The petitioner additionally contended that the disputed shop is situated in the main market area of Inder Bazaar, Jaipur, where several Photo Colour Labs are already operational. It was asserted that conducting his business from his own premises at such a prime commercial location would substantially enhance his prospects of earning a better income.

6. Upon service of notice, the respondents–tenants entered appearance and filed their reply, wherein they categorically denied the averments made in the eviction petition. It was cont