Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Rajasthan · body

2025 DAILYLAW 19192 (RAJ)

SHRI BADE MATHURESH JI TEMPLE BOARD v. SMT. VIMLA SHARMA WIFE OF LATE KAILASHCHAND SHARMA

CW/7752/2025 · 2025-05-20

Anoop Kumar Dhand

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 7752/2025 Shri Bade Mathuresh Ji Temple Board, Through Authorized Signatory Shri Satishchand Mishr Son Of Late Shri Jiut Bandhan Mishr, Aged 71 Years, Resident Of 239, Keshavpura Sector-7, Kota-Rajasthan. ----Petitioner Versus Smt. Vimla Sharma Wife Of Late Kailashchand Sharma, Aged About 61 Years, Resident Of H.no. C-314, Talandi Kota-Rajasthan, Business Address - Kailash Pan Bhandar And Cold Drinks, Bade Mathuradhish Mandir, Main Road, Patnapol, Kota-Raj. ----Respondent For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Narendra Singh Hada For Respondent(s) : JUSTICE ANOOP KUMAR DHAND Order 20/05/2025 1. By way of filing this writ petition, a limited prayer has been made for issuing directions to the Rent Tribunal, Kota to decide the eviction application No.35/2022 expeditiously within a time frame. 2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is a senior citizen of the age of 71 years. Counsel submits the petitioner filed an application under Section 9 of the Rajasthan Rent Control Act, 2001 against the respondent before the Tribunal in the year 2022, wherein, his evidence was completed and the case was posted for recording the evidence of the other side, but the other side is lingering the (2 of 2) [CW-7752/2025] matter by way of filing applications for delaying disposal of the said application, hence, under the compelling circumstances, the petitioner has approached this Court seeking aforesaid directions. 3. Considering the limited prayer made by the counsel for the petitioner and looking to the fact that the eviction application is pending since 2022 i.e. last more than three years and the evidence of the petitioner has been completed and looking to the age of petitioner i.e. 71 years, this Court deems it just and proper to dispose of the instant writ petition with the expectation from the Tribunal to make all possible endeavours to decide the pending eviction application expeditiously, as early as possible, preferably within a period of two years. 5. With the aforesaid observations/directions, the instant writ petition stands disposed of. Pending applications, if any, also stand disposed of. (ANOOP KUMAR DHAND),J KuD/92