JUDGMENT : Arun Bhansali, J. This writ petition has been filed by the petitioners aggrieved against order dated 10.01.2017 passed by the Rent Tribunal, Jodhpur, whereby, the application filed by the petitioners under Order 8, Rule 1 CPC has been rejected. 2. The petitioners filed an application for taking on record the certified copy of the challan, which it is alleged, was filed against the petitioners before the Tribunal. 3. It is submitted that the fact of filing of the FIR was already indicated in the reply before the Tribunal and as during the pendency of the said proceedings the challan has been filed, the same should have been taken on record by the Tribunal. 4. The Tribunal by its impugned order came to the conclusion that as the filing of the challan does not affect the merits of the case, based on which the petition was filed by the landlord, the document was not relevant and consequently rejected the application. 5. It is submitted by learned counsel for the respondent that the Tribunal was justified in rejecting the application as the same has no relevance to the issue before the Tribunal and, therefore, the order does not call for any interference. 6. Having considered the submissions made by learned counsel for the parties and having perused the material available on record, the fact that the petitioners had in the reply indicated about filing of the FIR against petitioners before the Tribunal and during pendency of the proceedings challan has been filed, irrespective of the fact whether the same had relevance to the subject matter before the Tribunal, once the plea has been raised in the written statement and a subsequent event thereto has happened, the document should have been taken on record by the Tribunal. 7. In view thereof the writ petition is allowed. The order dated 10.01.2017 to the extent of dismissal of application under Order 8, Rule 1 CPC is set aside. The Tribunal is directed to take the certified copy of the challan on record.