AMIT BHATI Vs. NARAYAN DAS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This writ petition has been filed by the petitioners- landlords (hereinafter referred to as 'the landlords') against the order dated 15.11.2017 passed by the Rent Tribunal, Ajmer in eviction case No. (236/2006) 218/2012, whereby the application filed by the landlords under Section 21 of the Rajasthan Rent Control Act, 2001 readwith Order 6 Rule 17 and Section 151 CPC for amendment in the original application has been dismissed. Facts of the case are that the landlords filed an original application against the tenant before the Rent Tribunal, Ajmer. During the pendency of the original application, the landlords filed

(2.) Facts of the case are that the landlords filed an original application against the tenant before the Rent Tribunal, Ajmer. During the pendency of the original application, the landlords filed another application under Section 21 of the Rajasthan Rent Control Act, 2001 readwith Order 6 Rule 17 and Section 151 CPC for amendment in the original application. The said application was dismissed by the Rent Tribunal vide itsorder dated 15.11.2017. Hence, this writ petition.

(3.) At the very out-set, learned counsel for the landlords submits that the Presiding Officer of the Rent Tribunal Ajmer, vide order dated 15.11.2017, allowed the application filed by the landlord under Section 21 of the Rajasthan Rent Control Act readwith Order 6 Rule 17 and Section 151 in Original Application No. 305/2006 (Amit Bhati Versus Roop Singh) and permitted to amend the original application as prayed for. However, in the instant case, the same Presiding Officer on the same day i.At the very out-set, learned counsel for the landlords submits that the Presiding Officer of the Rent Tribunal Ajmer, vide order dated 15.11.2017, allowed the application filed by the landlord under Section 21 of the Rajasthan Rent Control Act readwith Order 6 Rule 17 and Section 151 in Original Application No. 305/2006 (Amit Bhati Versus Roop Singh) and permitted to amend the original application as prayed for. However, in the instant case, the same Presiding Officer on the same day i.e. on 15.11.2017, dismissed the same application filed by the landlords under Section 21 of the Rajasthan Rent Control Act readwith Order 6 Rule 17 and Section 151 in Original Application No. (236/2006) 218/2012(Amit Bhati Versus Narayan Das). Thus, two contradictory orders were passed by the same Presiding Officer of the Rent Tribunal on the same day in the case of landlords, which is not permissible in the eyes of law. On this count, the impugned order dated 15.11.2017 passed by the Rent Tribunal is liable to be quashed and set-aside.