1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR -------------------------------------------------------- SPL. APPL. WRIT No. 936 of 2006 HARI NARAIN V/S RENT TRIBUNAL ,BIKANER & ORS. Mr. SURESH SHRIMALI, for the appellant / petitioner Mr. MS PUROHIT, for the respondent Date of Order : 29.5.2008 HON'BLE SHRI N P GUPTA,J. HON'BLE SHRI KISHAN SWAROOP CHAUDHARI,J. ORDER ----- Heard learned counsel for the parties. The main grievance of the appellant is that Hari Prakash has filed an application for being impleaded as a party. That application had already been dismissed. Thus, Hari Prakash is not a party in the litigation. In such circumstances, he had no right to file application to take his affidavit on record. The learned Tribunal has found that Hari Prakash claims to be the tenant, but then that aspect has already been clarified while dismissing his applcation vide order dated 13.10.2004, as such, he has not been found to be entitled to lead any evidence on his own behalf. However, it has been found that he can apear as witness on behalf of his brother and as a witness of the defendant, but that he could do within the prescribed time, and therefore, at that 2 belated stage, he was not allowed to do that either, and thus, the application was dismissed. The learned Single Judge disposed of the writ petition by directing that if the petitioner pays a cost of Rs.3000/-, the affidavit sought to be filed may be taken on record provided the respondent (present appellant) is also given opportunity of rebuttal and cross-examination. In our view, the matter is simply required to be clarified, though as has been already clarified, that the application of Hari Prakash cannot be said to be maintainable. However, the affidavit filed by him may be taken on record in pursuance of the order of the learned Single Judge as an evidence limited to the plea of the defendant and supporting the case of the defendant, and the learned trial Court will appreciate the evidence as any other piece of evidence led on behalf of the defendant while examining the case of the defendant. The appeal is, therefore, dismissed with the aforesaid clarification. ( KISHAN SWAROOP CHAUDHARI ),J. ( N P GUPTA ),J. /tarun/