1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JAIPUR BENCH, JAIPUR ORDER S.B. Civil Writ Petition No.4338/2008 Sanjay Kumar Gupta Versus Rent Tribunal, Kota & Another Date of Order :: 7th August, 2008 PRESENT HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE NARENDRA KUMAR JAIN Mr. Ashwani Chobisa for the petitioner BY THE COURT: The application filed by petitioner for early listing of the case is allowed and on the request of learned counsel for the petitioner, the case is taken up for arguments on the admission of the writ petition. 2. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner. 3. This writ petition on behalf of non- applicant-tenant is directed against the impugned order dated 10th May, 2007 (Annexure- 5) and order dated 25th March, 2008 (Annexure- 7) passed by the Judge, Rent Tribunal, Kota, whereby his applications for taking one invitation card and some photographs on record has been rejected. 4. The applicant-respondent no.2 filed an 2 application for eviction against non applicant- petitioner before Rent Tribunal, Kota on the ground of personal bonafide necessity and during the pendency of that application, the non applicant-petitioner filed an application dated 24th November, 2006 with a prayer that one invitation card may be taken on record. The application was dismissed by the Tribunal vide order dated 10th May, 2007. It is relevant to mention that earlier such orders were revisable under Section 115 CPC and period of limitation for revision was 90 days. Now after amendment in Section 115 CPC in the year 2002, the revision is not maintainable against such orders and in these circumstances the present writ petition has been preferred before this Court on 25.4.2008 challenging the said order i.e. after a delay of 10 ½ months. The writ petition against the order dated 10th May, 2007 is liable to be dismissed on the ground of delay and the same is hereby dismissed as such. I have also examined the impugned order dated 10th May, 2007 on merits and after considering the same, I do not find any illegality in the same also. 5. So far as another order dated 25th March, 2008 is concerned, the non applicant – 3 petitioner filed an application alongwith certain photographs to take the same on record and to mark exhibit thereon. The trial court rejected the application by observing that the petitioner has not given any reason for production of the said photographs. The application is not supported by affidavit nor the negative has been produced. The date of photographs has not been given. The relevancy of the photographs has also not been shown. After considering the submissions of learned counsel for the petitioner in the light of reasons assigned by the trial court, I do not find any illegality, perversity or jurisdictional error in the said order so as to interfere with the same. There is no merit in this writ petition and the same is, accordingly, dismissed in limine. (NARENDRA KUMAR JAIN),J. DK