1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JAIPUR BENCH, JAIPUR ORDER S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 3435/2008 {Mohammad Khalik Miyan & Another Versus Ramandas Nama & Another} Date of Order :: 11th August, 2008 PRESENT HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE NARENDRA KUMAR JAIN Mr. M.C. Jain for the petitioners Mr. L.L. Gupta for the respondent no.1 BY THE COURT: Admit. Mr. L.L. Gupta appears for respondent no.1. Service of respondent no.2 is dispensed with. 2. Heard learned counsel for the parties. 3. The applicant-respondent no.1 filed an application for eviction of the non-applicant / petitioner from the rented premise before Rent Tribunal, Tonk on the ground of default and personal bonafide necessity, wherein written statement has been filed by the petitioners. The non applicants-petitioners filed an application under Order 7 Rule 11 CPC for rejection of the application on the ground that they are not tenant in the rented premise, therefore, the present application is liable to be dismissed. The application was contested by the applicant. The learned Tribunal vide its 2 order dated 3rd January, 2008 dismissed the application. Being aggrieved with the same, the non-applicants petitioners have preferred this writ petition. 4. The learned counsel for the petitioners contended that he has filed three documents as Ex. A/1 to Ex.A/3 and a bare perusal of these documents will show that petitioners are not tenant in the rented premise, therefore, application for ejectment is not maintainable and the same should be dismissed. The learned counsel for the respondents has opposed the writ petition and supported the order passed by the Tribunal. 5. I have considered the submissions of learned counsel for the parties and examined the impugned order dated 3rd January, 2008. The learned Tribunal has observed that the applicant has filed the application with the averments that non applicants are tenant in the rented premise. The non applicants are tenant or not, the said fact will be decided after recording the evidence and arguments. The Tribunal has also observed that under New Rent Control Act, 2001, the entire provisions of CPC are not applicable. After considering the submissions of learned counsel for both the 3 parties, I do not find any illegality, perversity or jurisdictional error in the impugned order so as to interfere with the same. There is no merit in this writ petition and the same is, accordingly, dismissed with no order as to costs. (NARENDRA KUMAR JAIN),J. DK