1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. CIVIL WRIT PETITION NO.1571/08 Geeta Bai & Anr. Vs. Shri Digambar Jain Bada Mandir Date of order : 20/2/2008. HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE MOHAMMAD RAFIQ Shri Arvind Bhardwaj for the petitioner. ****** This writ petition has been filed against the order dated 24.1.2008 whereby application of the petitioner for placing on record rent receipts relating to the year 1982, 1984, 1986, 1994 & 1995 has been dismissed. Learned counsel for the petitioner argued that the documents are necessary for deciding the controversy in question. It is argued that learned Tribunal could not at this stage refused to believe the receipts merely because they contained certain cutting. Learned counsel submits that if one opportunity is given to the petitioner, he will produce the evidence even at this stage, thus receipts could not be filed at 2 the stage of evidence of the petitioner because they would not available with the petitioner. The receipts were discovered when the petitioner was cleaning his house during deepawali so receipts are genuine and their placing on record would not in any manner prejudice the respondents. On the other hand, learned counsel also submitted that the stand of the petitioner through out been that she had paid entire rent right from 1.11.1984 till now which was mentioned by the advocate of the petitioner in the notice dated 6.5.04 as also in the written statement / reply to the petitioner filed by the Tribunal. Having heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and perused the impugned order, I find that the learned trial court has rejected the application observing that receipts were sought to be produced when the matter was fixed for final arguments. It appears that the petitioner for eviction of the petitioner was filed in 2005 and the petitioner also filed her written statement as far back as on 27.4.2005. In the written 3 statement, the plea set up by the petitioners was that no rent was due to be paid and that the rent uptil the time of final of written statement and also for the period thereafter was deposited of the petitioner in the bank account. The learned trial court did not permit the documents not only because of the delay but also because he found that the receipts which were produced at certain cutting / erections as there was initially thereabout. Evidence of the petitioners as well as respondent was already concluded. The document which was sought to be produced therefore did not inspire the confidence to refuse them to take on record. The perusal of the written statement / reply filed by the petitioner before the Rent Tribunal shows that no such plea was set set by the petitioner that receipts issued to her were lost or she would produce the receipt at the later stage. On the contrary though it was stated that petitioner was making payment of the rent regularly, but what was stated that upto date rent amount was paid and also for 4 the subsequent period shall deposited in the bank account. I therefore do not find any illegality in the order passed by the Rent Tribunal. The writ petition is accordingly dismissed. (MOHAMMAD RAFIQ), J. RS/