MANGAL KUMAR Vs. MOHAMMAD YASIR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) BY the order dt. 08.01.2013 the Rent Tribunal, Jodhpur dismissed an application preferred by the tenant petitioners for having amendment in written statement. Being aggrieved by the same, this petition for writ is preferred. It is submitted by counsel for the petitioners that the respondent landlord is having an alternative accommodation i.e. House No. 121, Shanti Priya Nagar, Jodhpur but he concealed this fact while filing the application under Sec. 9 of the Rajasthan Rent Control Act, 2001 (hereinafter referred to as "the Act of 2001"). This fact was not in knowledge of the petitioners tenant at the time of filing written to the application, as such, the same was not included in that. However, in the original application where basic contention is about bona fide necessity of the rented premises, the amendment required is essential.

(2.) AS per counsel for the respondent landlord the application was preferred only to prolong the proceedings of the original application. The premises situated at 121, Shanti Priya Nagar, Jodhpur was not owned by the landlord on the date the original application was filed, therefore, the allegation of concealment of fact is misconceived. It is asserted that as a matter of fact the petitioners have already cross examined the respondent on this issue wherein the landlord has accepted that the property aforesaid belong to him, as such, the amendment sought for is inconsequential.

(3.) IN view of the facts noticed above, I do not find any wrong with the order impugned that may warrant interference of this Court while exercising powers under Art. 227 of the Constitution of India. The petition is dismissed accordingly.