1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------- SPL. APPL. WRIT No. 7 of 2010 PRAMOD KUMAR V/S MANOJ KUMAR & ORS Mr. VINEET SANADHYA for Mr. VIKAS BALIA, for the appellant / petitioner Date of Order : 15.2.2010 HON'BLE SHRI A.M.SAPRE,J. HON'BLE SHRI DINESH MAHESHWARI,J. ORDER --------- This is intra-court appeal filed by writ petitioner of Writ Petition No.2040/2009 against an order dt. 18.3.2009 passed by learned Single Judge in Writ Petition No. 2040/2009. (2) While disposing of the writ, the learned Single Judge made following observations:- “Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and perused the order dated 04.10.2008 passed by Appellate Rent Tribunal, Bikaner and the order dated 26.05.2004 passed by the Rent Tribunal, Bikaner. No interference is required in the orders passed by both 2 the courts below. Hence, the writ petition is dismissed.” (3) We have heard learned counsel for the appellant and perused the record of the case. Having perused the record, we are in agreement with the view taken by the learned Single Judge. In our opinion, it is just and proper calling no interference in our appellate jurisdiction. (4) We however only wish to add that the issue involved in the appeal relates to revision of monthly rent of a commercial premises situated in the city of Bikaner. This issue was examined on facts at length by the Rent Tribunal then by the Appellate Court and lastly by learned Single Judge in the impugned order. All the three namely Tribunal, appellate authority and Single Judge came to a same conclusion and in our view rightly. No more discussion is called for on issue of fact except what is taken note supra. Moreover, learned counsel for the appellant was not able to point out any infirmity or perversity or jurisdictional error in the impugned order. The appeal, therefore, fails, and is hereby dismissed in limine. ( DINESH MAHESHWARI ),J. ( A.M.SAPRE ),J. /Sushil/