ARJUN LAL Vs. LATE DAL CHAND

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Petitioner-tenant by the instant writ petition under Art. 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India has challenged order dated 1 st of March, 2019 (Annex.6) passed by Appellate Rent Tribunal, Udaipur (for short, 'Appellate Rent Tribunal').

(2.) .By the order impugned, learned Appellate Rent Tribunal rejected application of petitioner under Order VI Rule 17 read with Section 21 of the Rajasthan Rent Control Act, 2001 (for short, 'Act').

(3.) The facts, in brief, are that original landlord, Dalchand, filed a petition under Section 9 of the Act against petitioner for eviction from rented premises showing reasonable and bona fide necessity of his son Mahendra for doing his business. It is, inter alia, averred in the petition that presently Mahendra is having his temporary abode at Ahemdabad but he contemplates to shift at Udaipur, and therefore, the shop in question is required for carrying out his business. During pendency of the petition for eviction before learned Tribunal, original landlord Dalchand expired and therefore, his legal heirs were brought on record. Learned Tribunal, upon conclusion of the trial, allowed the petition of respondents for eviction by its judgment dated 24 th of April 2015. Feeling aggrieved by the same, petitioner approached the learned Appellate Rent Tribunal. When the appeal was pending, an endeavour was made by the petitioner to submit some documents showing factum of diminution in reasonable and bona fide necessity of the landlord. The petitioner filed copy of judgment of learned Tribunal passed on 17 th of November, 2016 in a petition for eviction filed against other tenant Munishwar by the landlord. As per version of the petitioner, during trial, in that petition, some facts come to the fore showing that reasonable and bona fide necessity of the landlord vis-a-vis shop in question now does not subsist. The learned Tribunal granted indulgence to the petitioner and taken the documents on record. Subsequently, at the behest of petitioner, application seeking amendment in reply to eviction petition under Order 6 Rule 17 CPC read with Section 151 CPC was filed. The said application is contested by respondents and the learned Appellate Rent Tribunal by the order impugned rejected the same by invoking proviso to Rule 17 of Order VI CPC. The Appellate Rent Tribunal observed that the petitioner has failed to show his due diligence for seeking amendment in the reply.