CW -959/06 - Mahesh Kumar Khariwal Vs.Rent Tribunal & Anr. : Order dt : 24.03.08 1/3 S.B. CIVIL WRIT PETITION NO.959/2006 Mahesh Kumar Khariwal Vs. Rent Tribunal & Anr. Date : 24.03.2008 PRESENT HON'BLE DR. JUSTICE VINEET KOTHARI Mr. V.K. Agarwal for the petitioner. Mr. C.S. Kotwani for the respondents. --------- 1. Heard learned counsels. 2. This writ petition is directed against the order of the learned trial Court dt.20th May, 2005 whereby the Rent Tribunal refused to take on record the documents filed by the petitioner in the suit for revision of the rent along with the rejoinder. Though the Rent Tribunal had taken on record the rejoinder, however, the documents filed along with said rejoinder were not taken on record upon an application filed by the respondent-tenant raising objection in this regard. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner Mr. V.K. Agarwal has brought to the notice of the Court the provisions of section 21(3) of the Rajasthan Rent Control Act, 2001 wherein it has been stated that the Rent Tribunal and the Appellate Rent Tribunal were not bound by the procedure laid down by the Code of Civil Procedure but shall be CW -959/06 - Mahesh Kumar Khariwal Vs.Rent Tribunal & Anr. : Order dt : 24.03.08 2/3 guided by the principles of natural justice and subject to other provisions of this Act or the prayers made therein shall have power to regulate their own procedure for the purpose of discharging their functions. He, therefore, submits that the learned trial court erred in refusing to take those documents on record which only could go to support the application filed by the petitioner for revision of rent. These submissions are opposed by the learned counsel for the respondents Mr. C.S. Kotwani on the ground that Section 14(3) only permits filing of rejoinder and Section 14(2) which permits filing of petition, affidavit and documents by both the sides. The said Section 14(3) does not indicate that additional documents can also be filed along with the said rejoinder. He submits that the petitioner cannot be allowed to make out a new case by filing additional documents with the rejoinder. 4. Having heard learned counsels and upon perusal of the record of the case, this Court is of the opinion that the documents sought to be placed by the petitioner along with the rejoinder do not make out a new case but they may support the case of the petitioner as originally stated in the suit filed for revision of the rent. One such rejoinder was taken on record by the learned trial court, there appears CW -959/06 - Mahesh Kumar Khariwal Vs.Rent Tribunal & Anr. : Order dt : 24.03.08 3/3 to be no cogent reason for not taking on record the documents filed along with such rejoinder. The learned trial Court could allow one more opportunity to respondent-tenant to either rebut those documents or by filing counter to such rejoinder if any. 5. Accordingly, this writ petition is allowed and the impugned order dated 20th May, 2005 is set aside and the documents filed along with the rejoinder of the petitioner are directed to be taken on record. However, one more opportunity is granted to the respondent tenant to raise his objection or rebut those documents before the learned Rent Tribunal in accordance with the law within a period of one month from today. 6. With these observations, this writ petition is disposed of. [ DR. VINEET KOTHARI ], J. item No.12 babulal/-