MEHENDRA SINGH RAJPAL Vs. RAJESH KUMAR JAGATRAMKA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) These two writ petitions are filed challenging a decision of the Rent Control Tribunal; for short, "Tribunal", constituted in terms of Article 323-B of the Constitution of India, under the provisions of the Chhattisgarh Rent Control Act, 2011; "Act", for short. That Tribunal is one whose decision is final in terms of the Act.

(2.) Heard the respective learned counsel for the Petitioner and the Respondents.

(3.) The Respondent-landlord filed an application seeking eviction on the ground referable to the ground at S.No. 11(h) among the landlord's right enumerated in Schedule 2 read with Section 12(1) of the Act. If that application is pursued to its logical end, the landlord may stand tied down to a condition that he shall not lease out the premises at a higher rent for at least twelve months thereafter. The landlord filed a second application for eviction on the allegation that the tenant is a habitual defaulter in payment of rent; that is, on a ground falling under Serial No. 11(a) in Schedule 2 of the Act. Pleading that both the applications for eviction cannot stand together, the tenant applied to the Rent Controller seeking dismissal of the applications for eviction, invoking Order II Rule 2 of CPC. The Rent Controller rejected that plea. Tenant filed two appeals before the Tribunal under Section 8(b) of the Act. The Tribunal dismissed those appeals holding that Order II Rule 2 of the CPC does not apply to proceedings under the Act. Hence these writ petitions.