CW 12783/08 //1// In the High Court of Judicature for Rajasthan Jaipur Bench ** Civil Writ Petition No.12783/2008 Raj Kumar Baid Versus Rent Tribunal, Jaipur & Ors. Date of Order ::: 06/03/09 Hon'ble Mr. Justice Ajay Rastogi Mr. Dinesh Kala, for petitioner Mr. Inderjeet Singh, for respondents NO.2 & 3 Matter has come up on application seeking vacation of interim order dt.17/11/08 filed by respondent (landlord). At request, matter has been finally heard and is being disposed of at admission stage. Instant petition has been filed by petitioner (defendant) assailing order dt. 23/08/08 (Ann.3) in Rent Case No.746/2007 whereby Rent Tribunal, Jaipur City has granted permission to respondents (plaintiff) while accepting documents & affidavits filed at the stage of rejoinder but right of rebuttal has also been given to the defendant. Respondents (plaintiff) filed a suit seeking eviction on the grounds of reasonable & bonafide necessity, non-user and availability of alternative accommodation to the petitioner (tenant) before the Tribunal U/s 9 & 15(1) of Rajasthan Rent Control Act, 2001 (“Rent Act”) for adjudication. CW 12783/08 //2// Counsel for petitioner submits that as per S.15 of the Rent Act, documents & affidavits on which the plaintiff (landlord) wants to place reliance, are to be initially submitted alongwith plaint and after written statement has been filed by defendant (tenant), plaintiff certainly can file rejoinder but no additional affidavit or documents can be filed at that stage and if that is permitted, it will be a never ending process for producing documents in evidence which is never the intention of S.15(4) of the Rent Act. On the other hand, Counsel for respondents (plaintiff) has brought to the notice of this Court a recent decision in Anoop Chand Vs. Nand Kishore (2008(2) WLC 91), wherein this Court has occasioned to examine scope of S.15(4) of Rent Act and finally observed ad infra: “8. It is ofcourse true that sub- section (4) does not say that the petitioner may file rejoinder accompanied by affidavits and documents and merely permits filing of rejoinder within 30 days of the date of service of reply; however, an occasion to file rejoinder would arise essentially when some averment or plea taken in the reply by the tenant calls for its replication from the applicant-landlord. If the suggestion that for want of omission of specific permission under sub- section (4) of Section 15 no affidavit or document could be filed with the rejoinder is accepted, it would lead to an absurd proposition that although the applicant may take pleadings in replication of any reply CW 12783/08 //3// averments, yet cannot support and substantiate such plea taken in replication by way of oral or documentary evidence. Such result is neither envisaged by the statute nor could be countenanced. 9. Noteworthy it is that there is no prohibition contained in sub-section (4) of Section 15 that no document or affidavit could be filed alongwith rejoinder. Even if the rule of literal interpretation is applied, as repeatedly stressed by the learned counsel, the submission that no evidence in the form of affidavit or document could be filed with the rejoinder, is itself in the nature of reading a prohibition in sub-section (4) of section 15 though there is no such prohibition contained. This court is clearly of opinion that no prohibition in filing documents and affidavits with rejoinder could be read in sub-section (4) when there is none.” In instant case, learned Rent Tribunal after taking note of affidavits & documents in support whereof, filed by respondents plaintiffs, right of rebuttal has been given to the petitioner (tenant) vide impugned order. In such circumstances, taking note of judgment of this Court (supra), no prejudice can be said to have caused to petitioner. This court has gone through order impugned and does not find any manifest error which may call for interference. Consequently, writ petition fails and is hereby dismissed. No order as to costs. (Ajay Rastogi), J. K.Khatri/p.3/12783CW08Mar6Rnt.doc