[2025:RJ-JP:26949]

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Civil Writ Petition No.10566/2025

1. Arun Fatehpuria Son of Late Shri Shankar Lal Fatehpuria, Aged About 63 Years, Resident of Tholia House, Tholia Circle, Mirza Ismile Road, Jaipur, Rajasthan.

2. Deepak Fatehpuria Son of Late Shri Shankar Lal Fatehpuria, Aged About 60 Years, Resident of Tholia House, Tholia Circle, Mirza Ismile Road, Jaipur, Rajasthan.

----Petitioners Versus Tarachand Tholia HUF, Through Pranshant Tholia S/o Shri Sharad Chandra Tholia, aged about 52 Years, Resident of Tholia House, Tholia Circle, M.I. Road, Jaipur, Rajasthan.

----Respondent For Petitioner(s) : Mr.Shashwat Purohit Mr.Ramesh Chandra Sharma Mr.Jaivardhan Joshi For Respondent(s) : Mr.Prateek Kasliwal Ms.Varnali Purohit Mr.Harsh Parashar JUSTICE ANOOP KUMAR DHAND

Order

Reserved on : : : 18/07/2025 Pronounced on : : : 25/07/2025 Reportable For convenience of exposition, this judgment is divided in the following parts:-

INDEX (1) The Challenge :-……………………………….…….…………….….......2 (2) Contention by the petitioners:-………….……………………….…..2 (3) Contention by the respondent:-…..…….……………………….…..5 (4) Analysis, Discussions & Findings:-………….……………………….7 (5) Conclusion:-…………………………………………………………15 The Challenge:-

1. A challenge has been led to the impugned judgment dated 31.05.2025 passed by the Appellate Rent Tribunal (hereinafter referred to as “the Appellate Tribunal”) by which the appeal preferred by the petitioners against the judgment dated 12.10.2022 passed by the Rent Tribunal No.2, Jaipur Metropolitan-

I (hereinafter referred to as “the Tribunal”) has been rejected.

2. By judgment dated 12.10.2022, the application submitted by the respondent/landlord (hereinafter referred to as “the respondent”) under Section 9 of the Rajasthan Rent Control Act, 2001 (hereinafter referred to as “the Act of 2001”), was partly allowed by the Tribunal and eviction order has been passed against the petitioners/tenants (hereinafter referred to as “the petitioners”), directing them to vacate the premises within a period of six months, from the date of the judgment and to pay the revised rent along with arrears to the respondent.

Contentions by the rival sides:-

(A) By the petitioners:-

3. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the respondents submitted an application under Section 9 of the Act of 2001 against the petitioner, before the Tribunal seeking eviction of the petitioners from the subject premises situated at Tholia House, M.I. Road, Jaipur on the ground of sub-letting, personal bona fide necessity and revision of rent in terms of Section 6 of the Act of 2001. Learned counsel submits that the respondent failed to establish that the petitioners had sub-let the subject premises or any part thereof, and transferred the possession of the same to third person.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the subject premises was originally let out in the year 1954 to a partnership firm named M/s.Vyapar Udhyog Pratishtan of which Shankar Lal Fatehpuria was the proprietor. Learned counsel submits that the aforesaid partnership firm is a registered firm having three partners namely; Arun Fatehpuria, Deepak Fatehpuria and Ankit Fatehpuria. Learned counsel submits that the respondent submitted an application under Section 9 of the Act of 2001, without impleading the aforesaid partnership firm and the third partner Ankit Fatehpuria. Learned counsel submits that non- impleadment of proper parties, rendered the application defective due to non-joinder of parties and the same was not maintainable. Yet, the Tribunal entertained the said application and passed the order impugned against the petitioners. Learned counsel submits that the entire rent of the subject premises has been regularly paid from the bank account of the aforesaid partnership firm i.e. M/s.Vyapar Udhyog Pratishtan for the last 70 years and the same has been accepted by the respondent. Learned counsel submits that in order to substantiate th