SHANKERLAL SANKHLA Vs. AGARWAL PANCHAYAT

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This writ petition has been preferred claiming the following reliefs:

(2.) Brief facts of the case, as placed before this Court by learned counsel for the petitioner/non-applicant, are that the respondent filed an application under Sec. 9(A), (I) & Sec. 18 of the Rajasthan Rent Control Act, 2001 (hereinafter referred as 'Act of 2001') before the learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate (Rent Tribunal), Jodhpur Metropolitan seeking eviction of the petitioner/non-applicant from the residential premises in question, as let out to the petitioner/non-applicant. Such eviction was sought on the ground of non-payment of rent of the residential premises in question by the petitioner/non-applicant. It was further stated in the application that the house in question was let out on 1/4/1999 on monthly rent of Rs.65.00; the rate of monthly rent remained the same till 2003, but after applicability of the Act of 2001, the petitioner/non-applicant was liable to pay the enhanced rent of the premises in question, but he did not make the payments, ever since the year 1999. Thereafter, the respondent-applicant sent a legal notice to the petitioner/nonapplicant calling upon him to make payments of the arrears of rent, but the same was not done.

(3.) Learned counsel for the petitioner/non-applicant submitted that the application moved by the respondent-applicant under Order 47 Rule 27 CPC read with Sec. 19 (9) of the Act of 2001 for taking certain documents on record was allowed by the learned Appellate Rent Tribunal, because no justifiable explanation was forthcoming in the said application, which may warrant taking of the documents, as mentioned in the application, on record. He further submitted that the impugned order is also erroneous on count of the fact that such documents were created subsequently, and thus, taking the same on record, at the stage of appeal, clearly runs contrary to law.