KIRAN SURANA Vs. ABHISHEK MAHESHWARI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) These petitions are directed against orders dated 30.3.19 passed by the Appellate Rent Tribunal, Jodhpur Metropolitan, whereby the appeals being No.38/18 and 39/18 preferred by the petitioners arising out of the order dated 22.2.18 passed by the Rent Tribunal, Jodhpur Metropolitan in Rent Case Nos.102/14 and 103/14 respectively, allowing the petitions preferred by the respondent seeking eviction of the petitioners from commercial premises, have been dismissed.

(2.) The respondent filed two separate petitions against the petitioners before the Rent Tribunal, Jodhpur Metropolitan seeking eviction of the petitioners from two commercial premises on the ground of reasonable and bona fide requirement, in terms of the provisions of Section 9(i) of the Rajasthan Rent Control Act, 2001 (for short "the Act of 2001"?). The respondent, who is a lawyer by profession, pleaded the requirement of the premises for establishing his office. The petitioners contested the petition by filing a reply thereto, taking the stand that the respondent has already established his office on the first floor of the disputed premises and therefore, the requirement of the premises as pleaded is not bona fide. The respondent filed a rejoinder to the reply filed on behalf of the petitioners, categorically denying the factum of the respondent running any office of his own on the first floor of the disputed premises or in the backside of shop no.2, 3 and 4. It was averred that the respondent acquired legal qualification in the year 2010 and since then he is running his advocacy office with his father in the rooms on the ground floor situated in the backside of shop no.2, 3 and 4.

(3.) On the basis of the pleadings of the parties, the Rent Tribunal framed the issues and parties led their evidence.