HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 11250/2025 Ramswaroop @ Pappu S/o Bobad Ram Saini, Aged About 63 Years, Shopkeeper Naya Bas Chaurayaa, Alwar. ----Petitioner Versus 1. Moolchand Saini S/o Kalluu Ram Saini, R/o Nayabas, Alwar (Deceased) 2. Smt. Kesar Devi W/o Late Moolchand Saini, (Deceased). 3. Ramesh Chand, S/o Late Moolchand Saini. 4. Niranjanlal, S/o Late Moolchand Saini. 5. Durga Prasad, S/o Late Moolchand Saini. 6. Deepchand, S/o Late Moolchand Saini. 7. Nandkishore S/o Late Moolchand Saini, R/o Nayabas, Tehsil And District Alwar (Raj.). ----Respondents For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Shreyansh Dhariwal and Ms. Pragya Seth for Mr. Akshit Gupta For Respondent(s) : Mr. Gajendra Singh Rathore JUSTICE ANOOP KUMAR DHAND Order 27/08/2025 1. The instant writ petition has been filed against the impugned judgment dated 05.03.2024 passed by the Rent Tribunal, Alwar (for short, ‘the Tribunal’) by which the application filed by the respondents under Section 6 and 9 of the Rajasthan Rent Control Act, 2001 (for short ‘the Act of 2001’) has been allowed and the petitioner has been directed to vacate the rented premises and pay the monthly rent (2 of 3) [CW-11250/2025] regularly, on the terms and conditions mentioned in the judgment. 2. Aggrieved by the aforesaid order, the petitioner submitted a statutory appeal before the Appellate Rent Tribunal, however the same was rejected vide judgment dated 11.07.2025 and the judgment passed by the Rent Tribunal has been upheld. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner after arguing for some time, on instructions of his client, has not pressed this petition on its merits. Alternatively, the petitioner prays for granting one and half years time to vacate the rented premises. 4. Per contra, learned counsel for the respondents opposed the prayer made by the counsel for the petitioner and submitted that the eviction proceedings, in pursuance of the application filed by the respondents remained pending for adjudication before the Rent Tribunal for considerable time, hence under these circumstances, granting one and half years more time to the petitioner would be unjustified for the respondents. 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 petition stands disposed of in the following terms:- 1. The petitioner shall be entitled to continue in possession of the suit premises till 01.03.2027 but not beyond that, subject to condition that he will hand over the vacant and peaceful possession of the rented premises to the respondents on or before 01.03.2027. (3 of 3) [CW-11250/2025] 2. The petitioner shall deposit the arrears of rent, due if any, within a period of three months and shall deposit two times of monthly rent from today, with the Bank account of the respondents 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. 4. In case the petitioner fails to deposit the rent consecutively for a period of four months, the respondents 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, Alwar 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 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 KuD/135