1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR O R D E R S.B. CIVIL WRIT PETITION NO.2166/2008 (Mohd. Rafique Vs. Abdul Khalil & Ors.) Date of order : 12.12.2008 P R E S E N T HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE GOPAL KRISHAN VYAS Mr. Abdul Aziz, for the petitioner. Mr. Irfan Gori, for the respondent. Heard learned counsel for the parties. No case is made out for interference in the concurrent finding given by Court below whereby the application filed by the petitioner under Order 6 Rule 17 of C.P.C. read with Section 21 of the Rajasthan Rent Control Act, 2001 for amendment was rejected because this matter can be adjudicated at final stage. It is made clear that in the Rent Control Act, 2001, the provisions of Civil Procedure Code have been made applicable to limited extent, which is enumerated under Section 21, therefore, Order 6 Rule 17 C.P.C. is not applicable in this case because, there is provision under Section 21 (3) of the Rent 2 Control Act that Rent Tribunal and Appellate Rent Tribunal shall not be bound by the procedure laid down in Civil Procedure Code but shall be guided by the principles of natural justice. In this view of the matter, the application under Order 6 Rule 17 of CPC is not maintainable but the Rent Tribunal can adopt any procedure as per principles of natural justice. In this case, although the application has been filed under Order 6 Rule 17 but for the purpose of amendment the prayer of the petitioner can be accepted on the basis of principles of natural justice. The facts of this case and the concurrent finding given by Court below does not require any interference by this Court. However, the petitioner can raise this ground at the time of final adjudication of the matter. Accordingly, the writ petition is dismissed. (GOPAL KRISHAN VYAS), J. arun