JUDGMENT 1. - Having heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and having perused the material placed on record, this Court is unable to find any jurisdictional error on the part of the learned Rent Tribunal where it has rejected the application moved under Section 21 of the Rajasthan Rent Control Act, 2001 and has declined the prayer as made by the petitioner for framing of an additional issue and taking evidence. 2. From the material placed on record, it appears that two matters have been remanded by the Appellate Rent Tribunal essentially for the inconsistency on the aspect regarding the rate of rent payable towards the premises in question as stated by the plaintiff; and it has been directed that the Rent Tribunal should hear the arguments together and then, decide the two petitions afresh. 3. The learned Rent Tribunal has taken note of the directions issued by the learned Appellate Rent Tribunal and has pointed out that essentially the issue after remand was as to whether, for the plaintiff having stated the rate of rent at Rs. 1130/- per month in Petition No. 30/2006, the other petition was required to be rejected ? 4. From the submissions as made on behalf of the petitioner, it is borne out that the question aforesaid relates to what has been pleaded by the plaintiff and obviously, the pleadings remain a part of the record; and no further evidence appears requisite in the matter. 5. This Court finds no jurisdictional error having been committed by the learned Rent Tribunal in rejecting the prayer made by the petitioner for framing such an additional issue and taking evidence particularly when such a procedure does not appear requisite in terms of the order of remand. 6. The petition fails and is, therefore, rejected.Petition dismissed. *******