1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JAIPUR BENCH, JAIPUR ORDER S.B. Civil Writ Petition No.10347/2008 {Dev Kishan Prajapati Versus The Regional Manager & Another} Date of Order :: 22nd September, 2008 PRESENT HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE NARENDRA KUMAR JAIN Mr. S.B. Singh for the petitioner BY THE COURT: Heard learned counsel for the petitioner. 2. The petitioner has preferred this writ petition with the following prayer: “The Respondent No. 1 may kindly be directed to pay the due amount of rent i.e. 4,93,593/- and further till date to the petitioner as per lease agreement dated 13.10.2003 (Annexure-4) alongwith interest @ 12% per annum from 1st May, 2005 to date of realization and further possession of the subject land may kindly be handed over to the petitioner.” 3. The aforesaid prayer makes it clear that petitioner has preferred this writ petition for recovery of arrears of rent, for which the adequate and proper remedy is to file a suit for recovery after payment of proper court fee in the trial court. The another prayer for possession of land in dispute can 2 also be agitated in the same suit before the trial court. For such a remedy, writ petition under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution cannot be said to be a proper and adequate remedy. Both the questions are disputed questions of fact, which can be adjudicated properly by adducing evidence before the trial court. 4. In view of above, I do not find any merit in this writ petition and the same is, accordingly, dismissed in limine. (NARENDRA KUMAR JAIN),J. DK