DHARAM SINGH SUHALKA Vs. SAIFUDDIN MOHD. KAJI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This writ petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India has been preferred on behalf of the petitioner challenging the judgment dated 4.3.2020 passed by the Rent Appellate Tribunal, Udaipur (for short 'the Appellate Tribunal') whereby, the appeal filed by the petitioner has been dismissed. The said appeal was preferred against the judgment and certificate for recovery of possession dated 28.4.2017 passed by the Rent Tribunal, Udaipur (for short 'the Rent Tribunal') in Case No.378/2014, which is also under challenge.

(2.) Brief facts of the case are that the respondent has filed an application under Section 3 (III) (b) read with Section 18 of the Rajasthan Rent Control Act, 2001 (for short 'the Act of 2001') seeking eviction of the petitioner from the premises located at Flat No.302, Third Floor, Oasis Park, 40 Ambavgarh, Udaipur (for short 'the rented premises'). As per the eviction petition, the rented premises was let out to the petitioner initially on 6.10.2008 for a period of one year through a rent deed. The said tenancy was extended up to 2011 through rent deeds for a period of one year each and lastly the rented premises was let out to the petitioner for a period of six months through rend deed dated 14.6.2012 whereby, the tenancy was started from 6.5.2012 and was supposed to end on 5.11.2013. It is also mentioned that the rented premises was let out to the petitioner at a rent of Rs.7500/- per month plus Rs.800/- per month as society charges and he was supposed to make payment of the electricity and water bills.

(3.) It is contended by applicant-respondent that the tenancy of the petitioner was terminated by serving a notice under Section 106 of the Transfer of Property Act, 1882 (for short 'the Act of 1882'), however, despite service of notice, the petitioner has not evicted the premises in question and, therefore, the eviction petition may be allowed and the petitioner be evicted from the rented premises.