BADRI PRASAD Vs. APPELLATE RENT TRIBUNAL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This writ petition has been filed by the petitioners being aggrieved with the judgment dtd. 30/10/2018 passed by the respondent No.1-Appellate Rent Tribunal, Bikaner (hereinafter to be referred as 'the Appellate Rent Tribunal'), whereby the appeal filed by the petitioners against the judgment dtd. 25/5/2012 passed by the respondent No.2-Rent Tribunal, Bikaner (hereinafter to be referred as 'the Rent Tribunal') has been dismissed.

(2.) The Rent Tribunal vide judgment dtd. 25/5/2012 allowed the application under Sec. 9 (a), (e), (f), (i) and (k) of Rajasthan Rent Control Act, 2001 (hereinafter to be referred as 'the Act of 2001') preferred on behalf of respondent Nos.3 and 4 viz. Meena Devi and Prakash Chand (both now dead) (hereinafter to be referred as 'the eviction petitioners') and passed a decree of eviction against the petitioners.

(3.) Brief facts of the case are that on 18/11/2004, the eviction petitioners had filed an application under Sec. 9 (a), (e), (f), (i) and (k) of the Act of 2001 before the Rent Tribunal seeking eviction of the respondent No.5-Ravindra Kumar and present petitioners viz. Badri Prasad, Leela Devi and Jugnu from the shop (hereinafter to be referred as 'the shop in question'). In that application, it was claimed by eviction petitioners that the shop in question (situated in Bothara Mohalla, Bikaner) was rented out to respondent No.5-Ravindra Kumar and petitioner No.1-Badri Prasad at the rate of Rs.200.00 per month in March 1985 for carrying out a business in the name of Ambika Trading Corporation. It was further claimed that up to 24/2/1993, respondent No.5-Ravindra Kumar and petitioner No.1-Badri Prasad paid the rent to them but thereafter they stopped the rent and sublet the shop in question to petitioner No.2-Leela Devi and petitioner No.3-Jugnu. It was also stated by eviction petitioners that they served a notice upon the present petitioners and respondent No.5 on 12/4/2004 claiming the due rent but the same was not paid and as the tenant withheld the rent for a period of more than four months, they are entitled to be evicted from the shop in question and the possession thereof be handed over to them. The eviction petitioners have also sought eviction of rented shops on the ground of bonafide necessity.