By impugned order, the learned Single Judge allowed the respondents writ petition and set aside the order of the Appellate Tribunal and restored the order of the Rent Tribunal which gives rise to filing of the special leave to appeal in this Court by the landlady.
The respondent denied the appellants need and, inter alia, companytended that the appellant is in possession of an alternative accommodation in the city and hence her alleged need set up in the eviction petition can be accomplished by using the alternative accommodation available in the city.
Heard Dr. Manish Singhvi, learned companynsel for the appellant and Mr. Purvish Jitendra Malkan, learned companynsel for the respondent.
5403/2015 whereby the High Court 164401 IST Reason has allowed the writ petition filed by the respondent herein.
Having heard the learned companynsel for the parties and on perusal of the record of the case, we are inclined to allow the appeal, modify the impugned order and remand the case to the Rent Appellate Tribunal for deciding the appeal 144/2014 afresh on merits.
The appellant landlady felt aggrieved and filed an appeal 144/2014 before the Appellate Tribunal.
By order dated 8.2.2011, the Rent Tribunal dismissed the appellants eviction petition holding that appellants need can be accomplished with an alternative space available with her in the city.
The appellant is the applicant, whereas the respondent is the numberapplicant in the eviction petition filed by the appellant against the respondent before the Rent Control Tribunal, Rajasthan out of which this appeal arises.
The Appellate Tribunal by order dated 12.2.2015 allowed the appeal, set aside the order of the Rent Tribunal, decreed the appellants eviction petition and passed the eviction decree against the respondent, in relation to the suit premises.
The appellant claimed respondents eviction from the suit premises on the ground of her personal bona fide need for raising companystruction in the existing suit premises to be used for her children and for stay of appellants guest in the suit premises.
The appellant a landlady of the suit premises filed the eviction petition against the respondent tenant of the suit premises under Section 9 of the Rajasthan Rent Control Act for short called The Act before the Rent Tribunal Kota R84/2005 praying therein for respondents eviction from the tenanted suit premises.
So the short question, which arises for companysideration in this appeal, is whether the High Court was justified in allowing the respondents tenants writ petition thereby justified in setting aside the appellate order of the Rent Appellate Tribunal and restoring that of the Rent Tribunal.
The respondent tenant felt aggrieved and filed writ petition before the High Court of Rajasthan Jaipur .
The issue involved in the appeal is short, as also the facts of the case lie in a narrow companypass, which would be clear from the narration infra.
Abhay Manohar Sapre, J. Leave granted.
This appeal is directed against the final judgment and order dated 02.01.2018 passed by the High Court of Rajasthan Bench at Jaipur in S.B. Civil Signature Not Verified Digitally signed by ANITA MALHOTRA Date 2018.10.29 Writ Petition No.
