RAMESHWAR PRASAD Vs. APPELLATE RENT TRIBUNAL KOTA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) HEARD learned counsel for the parties.

(2.) THE applicant/respondent No.3 filed application under Sections 6 and 9 of the Rajasthan Rent Control Act, 2001 (for short "the Act") for revision of rent and eviction of non-applicant/petitioner from the rented premise on the ground of personal bonafide necessity as well as sub-letting before Rent Tribunal, Kota. Rent Tribunal, Kota vide its order dated 17th April, 2006 allowed the application and while revising and increasing the rent, recorded a finding in respect of personal bonafide necessity as well as sub-letting in favour of applicant and consequently, granted a decree of eviction in his favour. Being aggrieved with the same, the tenant / non-applicant filed an appeal. Rent Appellate Tribunal, Kota vide its judgment dated 31st March, 2011 while reversing the finding in respect of personal bonafide necessity affirmed the finding of Rent Tribunal in respect of sub-letting and consequently, affirmed the decree of eviction passed by Rent Tribunal. Being aggrieved with the same, the tenant/petitioner has preferred this writ petition before this Court.

(3.) THIS Court, while exercising its powers under Article 227 of the Constitution, cannot convert itself into a Court of Appeal and cannot re-appreciate the evidence. Learned counsel for the petitioner is unable to point out any illegality or perversity in the findings of Tribunal as well as Rent Appellate Tribunal in respect of sub-letting. The question of subletting, in the facts and circumstances of the present case, is purely a question of fact and there is concurrent finding of facts in this regard by Rent Tribunal as well as Rent Appellate Tribunal, which cannot be interferred with by this Court, while exercising its powers under Article 227 of the Constitution of India. I do not find any error apparent on the face of record or jurisdictional error in the impugned order.