[2025:RJ-JP:30478] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 11859/2025 1. Ramesh Chandra Katta S/o Late Shri Radhakrishna Ji Katta, Resident Of House No. 313, Katta Bhawan, Lal Ji Sand Ka Rasta, Chaura Rasta, Jaipur (Deceased). 2. Smt. Sangeeta Katta W/o Shri Ramesh Chandra Katta, Aged About 65 Years, Resident Of House No. 313, Katta Bhawan, Lal Ji Sand Ka Rasta, Chaura Rasta And Flat No. 401, Asish Sapphire, Jai Ambe Colony, Ajmer Road, Jaipur. ----Petitioners Versus 1. Dhan Prakash @ Sonu S/o Late Shri Suresh Chand Ji Kasera, Aged About 32 Years, Resident Of House No. 1604, Thatheron Ka Rasta, Jaipur And Shopkeeper Firm Ganesh Narayan Suresh Chand, Shop No. 181, Tripoliya Bazar, Jaipur. 2. Rajkumar Katta S/o Shri Ramesh Chandra Katta, Aged About 65 Years, Resident Of House No. 313, Katta Bhawan, Lal Ji Sand Ka Rasta, Chaura Rasta And Flat No. 401, Asish Sapphire, Jai Ambe Colony, Ajmer Road, Jaipur. 3. Smt. Arti Sharma W/o Shri Gaurav Sharma, Aged About 40 Years, Resident Of House No. 4, Shanti Nagar, Dadi Ka Phatak, Jhotwara, Jaipur. ----Respondents For Petitioner(s) : Mr.Amit Gupta JUSTICE ANOOP KUMAR DHAND Order 07/08/2025 1. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the husband of the petitioner filed rent eviction application under Section 9 of the Rajasthan Rent Control Act, 2001 (for short, “the Act of [2025:RJ-JP:30478] (2 of 3) [CW-11859/2025] 2001”) against the respondents before the Rent Tribunal, Jaipur way back in the year 2012. Thereafter, he expired in the year 2022 and his wife submitted an application under Order 22 Rule 3 CPC for substitution in the array of cause-title of the said rent eviction application. Counsel submits that the said application for substitution was allowed by the Rent Tribunal vide order dated 31.01.2023 and the amended title was taken on record. Counsel submits that liberty was granted to the respondents to file amended written statement to the amended petition, but in stead of filing amended written statement, an application was submitted for removing the amended petition and affidavit from the record of the Tribunal. The said application submitted by the respondents was rejected by the Tribunal vide order dated 02.04.2025 and thereafter, time has been granted to the respondents to file to the amended application. 2. Counsel submits that more than 13 years have passed from the date of filing the rent eviction application against the respondents, but till date, the application has not been decided, hence, appropriate directions be issued to the Tribunal to decide the pending rent eviction application expeditiously within a fixed time frame. 3. Considering the limited prayer made by counsel for the petitioner and looking to the fact that the original rent eviction application has been lying pending for its adjudication since 2012 and more than 13 years have passed, in the meantime, original landlord has expired and his wife has been substituted on the record. It is concerning that the proceedings of the Tribunal are proceeding at snail’s pace. [2025:RJ-JP:30478] (3 of 3) [CW-11859/2025] 4. It is expected from the Tribunal to make all possible endavours to decide the application expeditiously as early as possible preferably within a period of one and half years from the date of receipt of certified copy of this order, without entertaining unnecessary request of adjournment made by either side. 5. Accordingly, the instant writ petition stands disposed of. Stay application and all other application(s), if any, also stand disposed of. (ANOOP KUMAR DHAND),J Aayush Sharma /2