1 2025:CGHC:57722-DB NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPC No. 1492 of 2023 1 - Gayatri Devi W/o Late Om Prakash Agrawal Aged About 65 Years R/o Danipara Raigarh ..........Defendants, District : Raigarh, Chhattisgarh 2 - Pankaj Agrawal S/o Late Om Prakash Agrawal Aged About 48 Years R/o Danipara Raigarh, District : Raigarh, Chhattisgarh 3 - Vikas Agrawal S/o Late Om Prakash Agrawal Aged About 44 Years R/o Danipara Raigarh, District : Raigarh, Chhattisgarh ... Petitioner(s) versus 1 - Chhattisgarh Rent Control Tribunal Raipur ........Appellants, District : Raipur, Chhattisgarh 2 - Nirmala Devi W/o Late Gopal Singhania R/o Vikas Nagar, Gali No. 01, Kotra Road Raigarh, District : Raigarh, Chhattisgarh 3 - Rajesh Singhania S/o Late Gopal Singhania R/o Vikas Nagar, Gali No. 01, Kotra Road Raigarh, District : Raigarh, Chhattisgarh 4 - Raju Singhania S/o Late Gopal Singhania R/o Vikas Nagar, Gali No. 01, Kotra Road Raigarh, District : Raigarh, Chhattisgarh 5 - Rakesh Singhania S/o Late Gopal Singhania R/o Near Lal Tanki ABHIGYA SAXENA Digitally signed by ABHIGYA SAXENA 2 Mosque, Raigarh, District : Raigarh, Chhattisgarh 6 - Madhvi Singhania W/o Late Gopal Singhania R/o Rukmani Vihar, Kotra Road, Raigarh, District : Raigarh, Chhattisgarh 7 - Vinod Beriwal S/o Parasram Beriwal R/o Vinod Steel, Near Dashrath Beetel Shop, Kotra Road, Raigarh, District : Raigarh, Chhattisgarh ... Respondent(s) For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Mateen Siddiqui, Advocate For Respondent(s) For State : : Mr. Hari Agrawal, Advocate and Mr. Prashant Dansena, Advocate Mr. Kishan Lal Sahu, Panel Lawyer (Division Bench) Hon’ble Smt. Justice Rajani Dubey Hon’ble Shri Justice Amitendra Kishore Prasad Order on Board Per, Amitendra Kishore Prasad, J. 27.11.2025 1. This petition has been filed by the petitioner seeking for the following relief(s):- “10.1. It is prayed that this Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to call for the entire records pertaining to case of the petitioner for its kind perusal. 10.2 That, this Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to issue an appropriate writ quash and set-aside the order dated 20.12.2022 (Annexure-P/1) passed by the Chhattisgarh Rent Control Tribunal, Raipur, Chhattisgarh. 3 10.3 That, this Hon'ble court may kindly be pleased to direct the respondents to deposit the rent in favour of the petitioner. 10.4 That, this Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to direct the Learned Rent Control Authority to decide the matter (C.A. No. 51863/59) within a stipulated time frame. 10.5 That, this Hon'ble court may kindly be pleased to issue an appropriate writ, order protecting the interest/possession of the petitioner failing which the very purpose of filing instant writ petition would be frustrated. 10.6 Any other relief/reliefs, which this Hon'ble Court may think fit and proper in the facts and circumstances of the case, with cost of the petition, may also please be granted to the petitioner.” 2. Facts of the case in brief are that The petitioners are the owners and legal heirs of land situated at Rakba No. 141/1, admeasuring 0.729 hectares at Village Baikunthpur, District Raigarh (C.G.) (“the said property”), of which approximately 1.25 acres was leased on 01.12.1996 by Late Om Prakash Agrawal, husband/father of Petitioners No. 1 to 3, to Late Gopal Singhania for a monthly rent of Rs. 2,000/- with an agreed enhancement of 10% every 11 months under a duly executed rent agreement; however, during the subsistence of the tenancy, Late Gopal Singhania unauthorizedly sub-let about 2,000 sq. ft. of the rented portion to 4 Respondent No. 7, Vinod Beriwal, without informing the owner and continued to receive rent from the sub-tenant, and following his death, Respondents No. 2 to 6, being his legal heirs, remained in possession as tenants and continued receiving rent from Respondent No. 7, but repeatedly refused to pay rent to the petitioners despite demands, compelling the petitioners to issue a legal notice dated 27.11.2019 seeking arrears and possession within six months; due to the respondents’ continued non- compliance, the petitioners initiated proceedings before the Rent Controlling Authority, Raigarh under Section 12(2), Schedule-2 (Sr. No. 11(a), (h), (f)) and Schedule-4 (Sr. No. 3) of the Chhattisgarh Rent Control Act, 2011 seeking possession and recovery of arrears amounting to Rs. 6,46,500/- for three years, whereupon the Authority, after hearing the parties, passed an order dated 25.03.2022 allowing the petitioners’ application under Section 7 of the C.G. Rent Control Adaptation Rules, 2016 and directing the respondents to deposit the due rent; the respondents, however, challenged the said order before the C.G. Rent Control Tribunal in Appeal No. 31/2022, which vide order dated 20.12.2022 set aside the Authority’s order on the ground that replies and documents had allegedly not been supplied, though this finding was erroneous as the order dated 25.03.2022 was not a final adjudication, did not preclude the filing of replies, and was duly passed under Section 7 requiring tenants to deposit rent within one month of notice; further, the respondents’ 5 application under Section 5(2) of the Rules seeking direction to the petitioners to deposit court fees of Rs. 70,48,393/- had been rejected by the Authority on 25.03.2022, yet the respondents prematurely approached the Tribunal without awaiting final adjudication and, by virtue of the Tribunal’s erroneous interference, avoided compliance with the statutory requirement of depositing rent, despite having already availed opportunity of hearing as reflected in their reply dated 14.03.2022 to the petitioners’ application under Section 7. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioners submit that they are the owners and legal heirs of land at Rakba No. 141/1, Village Baikunthpur, part of which was leased on 01.12.1996 by their predecessor, Late Om Prakash Agrawal, to Late Gopal Singhania on agreed terms, but during the tenancy Late Gopal Singhania unlawfully sub-let about 2,000 sq. ft. to Respondent No. 7 without consent and, after his death, Respondents No. 2 to 6 continued in possession while refusing to pay rent despite repeated demands and a legal notice dated 27.11.2019; consequently, the petitioners initiated proceedings before the Rent Controlling Authority, Raigarh for possession and arrears of Rs. 6,46,500/-, whereupon the Authority, vide order dated 25.03.2022, allowed their application under Section 7 of the C.G. Rent Control Adaptation Rules, 2016 and directed the respondents to deposit the rent, but the respondents prematurely challenged the said order in Appeal No. 31/2022 and the Tribunal erroneously set it aside on the 6 ground that replies were not supplied, although the order was not final and the respondents had already filed their reply dated 14.03.2022; the petitioners further submit that the Tribunal overlooked that the respondents’ application under Section 5(2) seeking direction for deposit of court fee had been rejected and that the appeal was filed merely to avoid compliance with rent- deposit obligations, and relying on the Supreme Court decisions in H.S. Yadav and Rajendra Diwan , they have approached this Hon’ble Court under Article 227 challenging the impugned order dated 20.12.2022. 4. The learned counsel appearing for the tenants submits that the Rent Controlling Tribunal has passed a reasoned and justified order in setting aside the direction closing the defence for non- deposit of rent, and therefore the order does not warrant interference. It is further contended that the petitioners are claiming rent for a period beyond three years, and as such the Authority has rightly passed the impugned order, which also does not call for any interference. 5. We have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the documents available on record with utmost circumspection. 6. From the perusal of the order dated 25.03.2022 passed by the Rent Controlling Authority, it is evident that the Authority considered the application under Rule 7 of the Chhattisgarh Rent Control Adaptation Rules, 2016, which clearly mandates that upon 7 service of notice, the tenant is required to deposit rent regularly in order to avoid being treated as a defaulter. The Authority found that despite notice dated 27.12.2021, the tenants neither deposited rent nor filed any reply to the application for eviction and recovery, although the law required such deposit before the Authority. The Authority therefore directed the tenants to deposit arrears of rent and file their reply, failing which their defence could be closed as per Rule 7. Importantly, no order actually closing the defence was passed. 7. Instead of complying with the direction, the tenants chose to file an appeal before the Tribunal. The Tribunal, however, without appreciating the mandatory nature of Rule 7 and without recording reasons regarding the tenants’ non-compliance, interfered with the Authority’s order on the erroneous assumption that replies were not supplied. The Tribunal overlooked the fact that the respondents themselves had filed a reply on 14.03.2022. The Tribunal further failed to consider that the tenants had not deposited even a single rupee of rent despite being legally obligated to do so. 8. The order of the Tribunal therefore suffers from manifest illegality, as the Authority had passed only an intermediary procedural order, not a final determination, and the tenants had no cause of action to prefer an appeal against such an order. The Tribunal, thus, committed an error apparent on the face of record in setting aside a lawful and justified direction. 8 9. Considering that the eviction proceedings have been pending since 2021, it is necessary that the matter be concluded expeditiously. 10. In view of the foregoing discussion, the writ petition is allowed. The impugned order dated 20.12.2022 passed by the Chhattisgarh Rent Control Tribunal in Appeal No. 31/2022 is hereby set aside, and the order dated 25.03.2022 passed by the Rent Controlling Authority, Raigarh, directing the respondents to deposit the arrears of rent and file their reply, is restored. The Rent Controlling Authority is directed to decide the pending eviction and rent-recovery proceedings on merits, strictly in accordance with law, within a period of two months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. The respondents shall deposit the arrears of rent before the Authority within four weeks from today, failing which the Authority shall be at liberty to proceed in accordance with Rule 7 of the Chhattisgarh Rent Control Adaptation Rules, 2016. In the meantime, the possession and interests of the respondents/tenants shall remain protected during the pendency of the proceedings. 11. With the above observations and directions, the petition stands allowed. No order as to costs. Sd/- Sd/- (Rajani Dubey) (Amitendra Kishore Prasad) Judge Judge Saxena