PRAKASH CHAND DHANKA SON OF SHRI GULAB CHAND v. LALA SON OF MUNIR KHAN
CW/16949/2018 · 2025-04-30
Anoop Kumar Dhand
body2025
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 27607 (RAJ) · dailylaw.ai ]
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 27607 (RAJ) · dailylaw.ai ]
Judgment text
Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.
[2025:RJ-JP:18139] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 16949/2018 Prakash Chand Dhanka Son Of Shri Gulab Chand, Aged About 60 Years, Resident Of 65, Khadi Colony, Hatwada Road, Sodala, Jaipur (Raj.) ----Petitioner Versus
1. Lala Son Of Munir Khan, Aged About 60 Years, Resident Of S-4, Hathroi Bavdi, Ajmer Road, Jaipur (Raj.)
2. Rajendra Singh Son Of Shri Laxman Singh, Resident Of Hasanpura-A, Near By Hanumanji Ka Mandir, Hasanpura, Jaipur (Raj.) ----Respondents For Petitioner(s) : Mr.K. L. Meena For Respondent(s) : None present JUSTICE ANOOP KUMAR DHAND Order 30/04/2025
1. By way of filing this writ petition, a challenge has been led to the impugned order dated 27.11.2017 passed by the Rent Tribunal, Jaipur Metro-I, Jaipur by which the application submitted by the petitioner under Order 1 Rule 10 CPC for his impleadment, as party in the array of cause-title in the Eviction Application, submitted by the landlord-respondent, has been rejected.
2. It is the case of the petitioner that in connivance with the tenant, a suit for eviction has been filed by the respondent- landlord for getting possession of the rented premises, while the petitioner is in occupation of the same.
3. The application submitted by the petitioner was rejected by the Tribunal by holding that there is no relationship of landlord
[2025:RJ-JP:18139] (2 of 2) [CW-16949/2018] and tenant between the petitioner and the respondent-landlord and that the respondent-landlord being dominus litis cannot be compelled to litigate against a stranger. In case, the petitioner claims himself to be owner or tenant of the property in question, he can avail other remedies available to him under the law.
4. This Court finds no merit and substance in this writ petition. Accordingly, the same is hereby rejected.
5. Stay application and all pending application(s), if any, also stand dismissed.
(ANOOP KUMAR DHAND),J Aayush Sharma /22