[2025:RJ-JP:19083] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 6584/2025 Bhawna Mehta W/o Anil Mohan Mehta, R/o 10, Opposite Aastha SBI, Rajbhawan Road, Civil Lines, Kota, (Raj). ----Petitioner Versus 1. Kavita Saxena W/o Virendra Saxena, R/o 2-B, Rameshwar Sadan, Civil Lines, Nayapura, Kota (Raj). 2. Virendra Kumar Saxena Advocate S/o Late Rameshwar Dayal, R/o 2-B, Rameshwar Sadan, Civil Lines, Nayapura, Kota (Raj). ----Respondents For Petitioner(s) : Ms.Harshita Sharma for Dr.Mahesh Sharma For Respondent(s) : Mr.L. L. Gupta JUSTICE ANOOP KUMAR DHAND Order 06/05/2025 1. The instant writ petition has been filed against the judgment dated 30.09.2024 passed by the Rent Tribunal, Kota by which the eviction application filed by the respondents under Section 9 of the Rajasthan Rent Control Act, 2001 (hereinafter referred to as “the Act of 2001”) has been allowed and the petitioner has been directed to vacate the rented premises within a period of six months. Additionally, if the petitioner defaults in payment of monthly rent, then she would be liable to pay thrice the amount of rent till handing over the possession of the premises to the re- spondents. 2. Aggrieved by the aforesaid order, the petitioner submitted an appeal before the Appellate Rent Tribunal, Kota. The said appeal [2025:RJ-JP:19083] (2 of 3) [CW-6584/2025] was rejected by the Appellate Rent Tribunal and the judgment passed by the Rent Tribunal dated 30.09.2024 was upheld, vide order dated 05.04.2025. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner after arguing the matter for some time, on instructions of client, does not want to press this petition on its merits. Alternatively, the petitioner prays for granting two year time to vacate the rented premises. 4. Per contra, learned counsel for the respondents opposes the prayer made by counsel for the petitioner and submits that the eviction proceedings in pursuance of the application filed by the respondents remained pending for adjudication before the Rent Tribunal for more than two years, hence under these circumstances, granting two year more time to the petitioner would be unjustified. Counsel submits that appropriate suitable time be granted to the petitioner to vacate the premises. 5. In view of the aforesaid submissions made by the counsel for the parties, this writ petition stands disposed of in the following terms:- 1. The petitioner shall be entitled to continue in possession of the suit premises till 06.05.2027 but not beyond that, subject to condition that she will hand over the vacant and peaceful possession of the rented premises to the respondent on or before 06.05.2027. 2.The petitioner shall deposit the arrears of rent, due if any, up to 06.08.2025 and shall continue to deposit the monthly rent @ Rs.12,000/- with the Bank account of the respondent by 15th of each successive month. 3.The petitioner shall not alienate or otherwise create third party right or hand over the possession of the rented premises in question to anyone. [2025:RJ-JP:19083] (3 of 3) [CW-6584/2025] 4.In case the petitioner fails to deposit the rent consecutively for a period of four months, the respondent shall be at liberty to execute the order passed by the Rent Tribunal without further reference to the Court. 6. Further the petitioner shall submit an undertaking on oath incorporating the aforesaid conditions before the Rent Tribunal, Kota within a period of four weeks from today. In case, the petitioner fails to submit the undertaking as aforesaid within a period of four weeks from today and/ or commits breach of any of the conditions of this order, the respondents shall be entitled to execute the order passed by the Rent Tribunal, Kota forthwith and shall obtain the possession of the rented premises in accordance with law. 7. The stay application and all pending applications, if any, also stand disposed of. (ANOOP KUMAR DHAND),J Aayush Sharma /24