GOPILAL Vs. KESHAV VALLABH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) AT request, matter was finally heard at admission stage. Instant petition has been filed by tenant (defendant) assailing judgment dt. 13/03/07 (Ann. 1) of Civil Judge, Bundi (Civ. Suit No. 13/04) whereby decree was passed in favour of plaintiff directing defendant (petitioner herein) to vacate the suit premises within three months, against which appeal (Rent)-6/2007 was preferred by tenant (defendant) but was dismissed by District judge (Appellate Rent Tribunal) Bundi vide judgment dt. 22/11/07 and six months' time was further granted to vacate suit premises.

(2.) AS alleged in writ petition, respondents (Plaintiff) filed a civil suit u/ss 9 (a), (d), (i) and (m-ii) of Rajasthan Rent control Act, 2001 (Rent Act) on 03/02/2004 seeking eviction on the ground of default in payment of rent, bonafide necessity, nuisance and unfit for human habitation. After pleadings of parties, the Rent Tribunal framed six issues; and after recording of the evidence on record, the Rent Tribunal recorded the finding that defendant (tenant) failed to pay monthly rent @ Rs. 100/- from 01/07/2002 therefore, plaintiff is entitled to decree of eviction; and decided all the issues against the defendant; and finally decreed the suit with the direction to the tenant to vacate suit premises and hand over peaceful vacant possession whereof to the landlord within three months and would continue to pay monthly rent determined by the Tribunal vide judgment and decree dt. 13/03/07, against which petitioner preferred appeal. Rent appellate Tribunal affirmed the findings recorded by rent tribunal and consequently dismissed the appeal on 22/11/07. Respondents entered into a caveat and on 07/08/08 on their behalf, time was sought for filing the reply and undertook not to execute the decree for a period of two weeks.

(3.) ON 22/07/09 both the Counsel sought time to seek instructions. Counsel for petitioner tried to convince this Court on merits that the findings impugned are perverse and inconsistent to the evidence on record despite concurrent findings of fact recorded by courts below and finally Counsel alternatively submits that atleast some time be granted to the petitioner (tenant) so that he may be able to find out alternative accommodation.