GHANSHYAM SWAMI Vs. MEHNAAZ HUSSAIN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Instant writ petition has been preferred by the petitioner challenging the impugned order dtd. 16/1/2021 passed by the Rent Tribunal, No.1 (Additional Senior Civil Judge cum Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, No.1), Jaipur Metropolitan-I, Jaipur, in Original Application No.607/2019, titled as Smt. Mehnaaz Hussain Vs. Ghanshyam Swami, whereby the application under Sec. 151 of C.P.C. dtd. 8/1/2021 filed by the petitioner to consider the delay and allow him an opportunity to file reply to the original application, had been dismissed.

(2.) Facts of the present case, in brief, are that the respondent had filed a petition under Sec. 9 of the Rajasthan Rent Control Act, 2001 for eviction of the petitioner on 14/10/2019. The learned Tribunal closed the right of the petitioner to file the reply to the original application on 2/1/2020. The petitioner moved an application under Sec. 151 of C.P.C. to consider the delay and grant him an opportunity to file reply to the original application, which was rejected vide impugned order dtd. 16/1/2021 by the learned Tribunal. Hence, this petition.

(3.) Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner has submitted that the learned Tribunal has committed illegality in passing the impugned order. Counsel has further submitted that it is a settled law that forty-five days time should be granted from the date of filing of Vakalatnama/Power by the Advocate to file reply to the original application. However, the same was not followed by learned Tribunal and it erroneously closed the right of the petitioner to file the reply to the original application. As such, the petition may kindly be allowed.