[2025:RJ-JP:30207] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 10489/2025 Goverdhan Singh S/o Sh. Ummed Singh, R/o Plot No. 19, Jaishree Nagar, Sector 8, Malviya Nagar, Jaipur. ----Petitioner Versus Smt. Neelam Chaudhary W/o Sh. Anurag Chaudhary, Proprietor Of Robusta Cafe - 111/89, Vijay Path, Mansarovar, Jaipur. ----Respondent Connected with S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 10668/2025 Smt. Madhushri Hada W/o Sh. Sangram Singh, R/o Plot No. 3/244, Malviya Nagar, Jaipur Through Power Of Attorney Holder Sudhindra Kumar Singh S/o Sh. B.p. Singh, R/o B-119, Mangal Marg, Bapu Nagar, Jaipur. ----Petitioner Versus Smt. Neelam Chaudhary W/o Sh. Anurag Chaudhary, Proprietor Of Robusta Cafe - 111/89, Vijay Path, Mansarovar, Jaipur. ----Respondent Connected with S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 10692/2025 Sangram Singh S/o Sh. Jagan Singh, R/o Plot No. 3/244, Malviya Nagar, Jaipur. ----Petitioner Versus Smt. Neelam Chaudhary W/o Sh. Anurag Chaudhary, Proprietor Of Robusta Cafe- 111/89, Vijay Path, Mansarovar, Jaipur. ----Respondent For Petitioner(s) : Mr.A.K. Bhandari, Sr.ADV. with Mr.Abhishek Bhandari JUSTICE ANOOP KUMAR DHAND [2025:RJ-JP:30207] (2 of 3) [CW-10489/2025] Order 06/08/2025 1. Since common question of facts are involved in all these three writ petitions, hence all the writ petitions are decided by this common order. 2. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that two different rent eviction applications have been submitted by the petitioners against the respondents in the years 2019 and 2022 and an application for permanent injunction has also been filed by the respondents against the petitioner in the year 2019. Counsel submits that in the rent eviction application No.169/2022, till date, no issues have been framed and in other two applications which were filed in the year 2019, only the issues have been framed and till date, the evidence of the petitioner has not been recorded and no orders have been passed. Counsel submits that everytime the case is deferred from one date to another by the Tribunal and in between more than six years have passed. Counsel submits that under these circumstances, appropriate directions be issued to the Tribunal to decide the pending rent eviction applications expeditiously within a time frame. 3. Considering the limited prayer made by counsel for the petitioner and looking to the fact that the two rent eviction applications are pending since last more than six years and one rent eviction application is pending since last more than three years, this Court deems it just and proper to dispose of these writ petitions with the expectation from the Tribunal to make all possible endavours to decide the applications, expeditiously as [2025:RJ-JP:30207] (3 of 3) [CW-10489/2025] early as possible, preferably within a period of one and half years from the date of receipt of certified copy of the order. 4. The instant writ petitions stand disposed of accordingly. Stay application and all pending application(s), if any, also stand disposed of. (ANOOP KUMAR DHAND),J Aayush Sharma /55-56-57