LIVE Course on Transfer Property Law | Price Hike in 4 days | Grab it now!
LCI Learning

Share on Facebook

Share on Twitter

Share on LinkedIn

Share on Email

Share More

ronak (mr)     15 January 2012

Rent control act rajasthan

Case: Rajasthan State ACT: Rajasthan Rent control act 2001 Property : Shop (commercial) case summary: one shop is given to tenant around 20 years back. After some years case was filed to evict tenant. on the ground of personal necessity of landlord for his personal use and for his children business. After some years in year 1999 the trail court gave the judgment in the favor of landlord and order to evict the tenant.. now in 2002 tenant appeal in appealate court the lower court erred in judgment....and grounds that there is no personal necessity of landlord.. For the last 7-8 years matter is pending in appealate court........ every time tenant bring new application in upper court under o6 r17 cpc and bring new facts that landlord children is doing business in different cities etc and other facts but failed to prove any facts in court just to delay the court proceddings. my question is: Is there any limit of bringing amendments in appeal? Is there any limit of bringing adjournment in appeal? does landlord are committing crime to give shop or house to tenant ? Can landlord ever get the justice to bring back their land and use is personally? Is it not necessary to put some limit on number of years the tenant and use the property like 5 or 7 years etc. Is there any way to evict tenant ? please give any ruling in the favor of landlord to evict tenant Thanks


Learning

 8 Replies

DEFENSE ADVOCATE.-firmaction@g (POWER OF DEFENSE IS IMMENSE )     15 January 2012

Law is not in favor of landlords, when you are so much particular about using your property why you let it at the first place.Law is lengthy process.

Narendra Malik (advocate)     12 March 2012

1. I think appeal is filed under rent control act of 1950 and not under rent control act of 2001 because in new act appeal is to be decided within 180 days after the service of summons of appeal on opposite party Section 19(8).

2.  Better to file writ petition under Art. 226 and 227 of the constiitution of India in Rajasthan High Court for early disposal of appeal.

Advocate Bhartesh goyal (advocate)     18 March 2012

Yes queriest query is regarding Rajasthan Rent {control and eviction } Act 1950 and not regarding Rajasthan Rent Control Act 2001.Approach to High court and get direction for early disposal of appeal.There are many citations which favours to landlord do not worry.

DEFENSE ADVOCATE.-firmaction@g (POWER OF DEFENSE IS IMMENSE )     19 March 2012

 

Anything you try to fix will take longer and cost you more than you thought.

shakti (manager)     17 May 2012

Ok an what abt if tenant has got that shop as pagdi system.where at that time the pagdi amount was as good as todays buying amount.

Rajat Vyas (Lawyer)     20 December 2012

supreeme court  of india decied that land lord is betar judge for use of his proparty n tenent cant advaice to his land lord to use another proparty.......a land lord cant wait to evecte disputed proparty pendency of suit he is entaitaled to run other bussnes.........if you want judgement in fever of you.... you send me email..advrajatvyas@gmail.com..i will send you judgements lists..

Amit Gupta (Advocate)     11 February 2013

Dear...

for such a situation you shuld file application under order 41 rule 5 of CPC for mesne profits, the court will decide the enhance rent of the property according to the present market value, further if u want more rent you can challange the order to high court, and then in high court u can get direction to decide the appeal within one month...

regards

Amit

riya kanwar (nill)     01 May 2014

I need an advice….

There is a Temple and the market is situated just at the entrance of the temple. The land where the market is there is of municipality but is under the possession of temple since many years. So all the rent by the shopkeepers is been submitted to the temple. There were no changes done in the temple for these many 30 years but now after 30 years the trustees are saying them to increase the rent and not only that they are even said to sign on papers which contain 18 rules to be followed by the shopkeepers and not even one rule is in favor of the shopkeepers. Trustees are also making some or the other changes in temple like by opening another door just opposite side of temple and they are allowing the passengers to enter from the front gate but saying them to move out from another side and indirectly not allowing them to wait and have a look to the market because it is obvious that first priority of passenger coming there will be to first go to temple and then have a look to market but now they are send directly out of another gate from which they do not return back  . Because of that a lot of loss is being suffered by the shopkeepers there and all this changes are happening after 30 years.

The list of rules which they have given include this point also that they may through out any shopkeeper from the shop after every 11 months , secondly says that the things they are selling should sell according to their wish and according to their market value.  

     So my question is that is this right for them to make any such sudden changes after 30 years and making and forcefully wanting the shopkeepers to sign on the paper? All this is happening after 30 to 32 years is this all possible is there no wrong in this any law which can help us……please need an advice.


Leave a reply

Your are not logged in . Please login to post replies

Click here to Login / Register  


Start a New Discussion Unreplied Threads



Popular Discussion


view more »




Post a Suggestion for LCI Team
Post a Legal Query