Research › Search › Judgment

Rajasthan High Court · body

2019 DIGILAW 2842 (RAJ)

Subash Saxena v. Harinarayan Agarwal

2019-11-14

ASHOK KUMAR GAUR

body2019
JUDGMENT : Ashok Kumar Gaur, J. 1. The present writ petition has been filed by the petitioner tenant challenging the order dated 20th July, 2019, whereby the application filed by the petitioner to strike off/ignore the affidavits, filed on behalf of the landlord of the property, has been dismissed. 2. The brief facts of the case are that initially, the landlord - Harinarayan Agrawal had filed an application for eviction of the shop. The said landlord expired after filing of the application and his legal heirs, namely, Smt. Rampyari Devi, Rambabu Agrawal, Girdhari Agrawal and Ashok Agrawal, were taken on record to pursue the application filed by late Harinarayan Agrawal. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that initially, when the application was filed, it was specifically mentioned in Para No.11 that the affidavits of landlord Harinarayan Agrawal, Shyam Bansal, Smt. Lalita Devi and Hansraj Agrawal were filed to support the claim of the landlord against the petitioner. 4. Learned counsel submitted that after death of Harinarayan Agrawal, the affidavits, which were to be taken into consideration for the purpose of deciding the controversy, cannot be of Rambabu Agrawal and Ashok Agrawal. 5. Learned counsel submitted that as per Section 15 of the Rajasthan Rent Control Act, 2001 (for short "the Act of 2001"), copy of the petition has to be accompanied by the affidavits and documents and only these documents are required to be considered by the Court. Learned counsel submitted that the impugned order has not considered the scope of Section 15 of the Act of 2001 and the application, filed by the petitioner, has wrongly been dismissed. 6. I have considered the submissions made by learned counsel for the petitioner and perused the record of the case. 7. This Court finds that initially, when the application was filed by the landlord - Harinarayan Agrawal, his legal heirs, including, Rambabu Agrawal and Ashok Agrawal have been taken on record. The Court below has rightly come to the conclusion that since the legal heirs and Harinarayan Agrawal are already party to pursue the application, their affidavits cannot be removed from the record and the same cannot be ignored for the purpose of considering the averments made in the application for eviction. 8. The Court below has rightly come to the conclusion that since the legal heirs and Harinarayan Agrawal are already party to pursue the application, their affidavits cannot be removed from the record and the same cannot be ignored for the purpose of considering the averments made in the application for eviction. 8. This Court finds that the affidavits, which are filed by legal heirs of the landlord - Harinarayan, necessarily will prove the contents, which have been mentioned in the application for eviction. 9. The petitioner, who is admittedly tenant in the premises, cannot raise objection that the affidavits of the persons, who were already on record, are required to be ignored for the purpose of considering the issue, which is involved in the case. The application has rightly been rejected by the Court below vide impugned order dated 20th July, 2019 and it does not require any interference by this Court. Accordingly, the present writ petition is dismissed.