INDRAJIT SINGH SAHNI Vs. GAGANDEEP SINGH SAHNI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard Mr. Anil Tripathi, learned counsel appearing for the petitioners. Also heard Mr. Lukesh Kumar Mishra, learned counsel appeared through Video Conferencing for Caveator.

(2.) The instant petition has been filed by the petitioners with following prayer:

(3.) Learned counsel appearing for the petitioners submits that the learned Chhattisgarh Rent Control Tribunal committed grave error in dismissing the appeal solely on the ground of delay, despite the petitioners providing just, valid, and reasonable grounds for condonation of the delay. The petitioners acted diligently and filed the appeal immediately upon gaining knowledge of the impugned order dtd. 26/12/2024, which was received by way of caveat notice from the respondent. The learned Tribunal failed to consider that the petitioners had demonstrated sufficient cause for the delay within the meaning of Sec. 5 of the Limitation Act, 1963, and that rejection of the application has caused serious and irreparable prejudice to the petitioners. The learned Rent Controller acted beyond its jurisdiction and entertained an application that was not maintainable due to the absence of any valid cause of action arising from the documents submitted by the respondent. The impugned order dtd. 13/6/2025 is illegal, arbitrary, and violative of the principles of natural justice, as it denies the petitioners an opportunity to be heard on the merits of the matter. In the interest of justice, equity, and fair play, the petitioners deserve to have their appeal heard and decided on merits. Thus, the petition may be allowed.