[2026:RJ-JP:31491] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 15344/2026 CNR: RJHC020764752026 | URN: CW / 32687U / 2026 Vandana Vashisht W/o Sunil Dutt Vashisht D/o Late Shyam Sundar Sharma, aged about 56 Years, Resident of opposite Golden Dairy, Near Indu Art Studio, Kotadi Road, Gumanpura Kota. ----Petitioner Versus 1 Smt. Usha Sharma W/o. Late Shri Shyam Sunder Sharma, Resident of Near Subhadhra Bhawan, Kotadi Road, Gumanpura, Kota through Legal Representative Smt. Meena Sharma W/o Late Shri Rajiv Sharma, Resident of Near Subhadhra Bhawan, Kotadi Road, Gumanpura, Kota (Rajasthan). 2 Salimuddin S/o. Kamruddin, Resident of 6-D-26, Near Kagdiyon Ki Masjid, Vigyan Nagar Extension Scheme, Kota. ----Respondents For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Shailesh Prakash Sharma For Respondent(s) : Mr. Shantanu Gupta HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUDESH BANSAL Order 11/08/2026 1. Instant Civil Writ Petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India has been filed by petitioner, feeling aggrieved by the judgment dated 10.07.2026 passed in Appeal No.8/2026 by the Appellate Rent Tribunal, Kota, dismissing her appeal and affirming the order dated 22.04.2026 passed in Execution Case (CIS) No.6/2025 by the Rent Tribunal, Kota, whereby and whereunder the objections filed by the petitioner under Order 21 Rule 97 read with Section 151 CPC, were rejected. [2026:RJ-JP:31491] (2 of 4) [CW-15344/2026] 2. The dispute is in respect of shop situated at Kotdi Road, Gumanpura, Kota, which was in tenancy of one tenant-Salimuddin (respondent No.2 herein). Against tenant-Salimuddin, Smt. Usha Sharma (respondent No.1 herein), who was the owner and landlord, filed one Original Application No.26/2013 (CIS No.780/2014) to dispossess the tenant. During course of original application, Smt. Usha Sharma passed away and based on her Will dated 15.06.2009, Smt. Meena Sharma, who happens to be her daughter-in-law being widow of her deceased son Rajeev Sharma, was substituted in place of deceased Smt. Usha Sharma and proceedings of original application were continued. It appears that petitioner, who happens to be natural daughter of deceased Smt. Usha Sharma, also filed an application for her substitution and impleadment, but same was dismissed vide order dated 15.09.2023. 3. It appears from the record that thereafter, proceedings of original application were continued by Smt. Meena Sharma and same were culminated and a final order dated 30.08.2024 has been passed by the Rent Tribunal, Kota. The final order dated 30.08.2024, was challenged by tenant-Salimuddin and his appeal has been dismissed vide judgment dated 10.07.2026. Thereafter, tenant filed S.B. Civil Writ Petition No.14040/2026 before this High Court wherein the tenant has voluntarily vacated the rented shop and handed over the possession to Smt. Meena Sharma and has taken the vacant possession of shop No.4 from Smt. Meena Sharma, as agreed by both parties. In above terms, S.B. Civil Writ Petition No.14040/2026 has been disposed of by this Court today itself vide a separate order dated 11.08.2026. [2026:RJ-JP:31491] (3 of 4) [CW-15344/2026] 4. In the instant writ petition, petitioner has come up with a case that although after dismissal of her application for substitution/impleadment vide order dated 15.09.2023, she never challenged the order nor filed any leave to appeal against the final judgment and order dated 30.08.2024, rather she continued her right to claim share in the rented shop in her pending suit for partition. Finally, her suit for partition has been decreed vide judgment dated 19.12.2024 and she has been assigned 1/4th share in the suit properties including the rented shop. Hence in that view, petitioner submitted objections under Order 21 Rule 97 read with Section 151 CPC against the execution of the eviction certificate and arrears of rent passed vide final order dated 30.08.2024, which have been dismissed vide order dated 22.04.2026. According to petitioner, the possession of rented shop and the amount of arrears of rent then be kept in custody of receiver. 5. Nonetheless, counsel for petitioner, during course of arguments, admits that against the judgment and preliminary decree for partition dated 19.12.2024, a Civil First Appeal No.361/2025 has been filed by and on behalf of Smt. Meena Sharma, who happens to be legatee of Smt. Usha Sharma so also one of the successor, being widow of her deceased son Rajeev Sharma and that first appeal is yet pending and an interim stay order is operating therein. His further submission is that since the possession of rented shop has already been handed over by the tenant to Smt. Meena Sharma, therefore, at this stage, this writ petition may be disposed of with observation that the right of petitioner to claim his share in the rented shop qua Smt. Meena [2026:RJ-JP:31491] (4 of 4) [CW-15344/2026] Sharma, would not be affected by the impugned orders and shall remain intact, which would be governed as per final outcome of Civil First Appeal No.361/2025 and for claiming share in rent of shop, petitioner may be set at liberty to take appropriate remedy in law. 6. In view of above, this Court is not required to enter into merits/demerits of the impugned order/judgment dated 22.04.2026 and 10.07.2026, dismissing objections and this writ petition is disposed off with observations that the right of petitioner to get her share in the rented shop & rent, shall not be adversely affected by dismissal of her objections under the impugned orders and same shall be governed as per the judgment dated 19.12.2024, passed in suit for partition and as per final outcome of Civil First Appeal No.361/2025 thereagainst. 7. With aforesaid observations, instant writ petitions stands disposed of. 8. Stay application and other pending application(s), if any, stand disposed of. (SUDESH BANSAL),J 69/NITIN