All Are v. Shri Mukesh Gupta
High Court
05 Aug 2020 In favour of: Unclear
Forum / Bench
High Court · jaipur
Parties
All Are v. Shri Mukesh Gupta
Date of order
05 Aug 2020
Assessment year(s)
—
Outcome
Other
The order — as passed by the High Court
Case summary
In All Are v. Shri Mukesh Gupta, the High Court (2020) decided the matter.
Summary auto-generated from the order below — read the full judgment for the complete reasoning.
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN
BENCH AT JAIPUR
S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 12978/2019
1. Smt. Manorama Devi W/o Late Shri Ramsingh Garg(Deceased), (Deleted Vides Order Dated 24.1.2019)(Deceased), (Deleted Vides Order Dated 24.1.2019)
2. Shri Ramesh Chand Agarwal S/o Late Shri RamsinghGarg, Aged About 59 Years, Garg, Aged About 59 Years,
3. Smt. Kusum Agarwal W/o Shri Ramesh Chand Agarwal,Aged About 57 Years, Aged About 57 Years,
All are R/o 6, Income Tax Colony, Vaishali Nagar, Ajmer.
----Landlord/Petitioners
Versus
Shri Mukesh Gupta S/o Late Shri Gaurishanker Gupta, Shop No.57, Khailand Market, Ajmer.
----Tenant/Respondent
For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Rahul AgarwalFor Respondent(s):
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MAHENDAR KUMAR GOYAL
Order
05/08/2020
The matter comes up on letter dated 05.08.2020 seekingextension of time for disposal of the Eviction ApplicationNo.174/2012. This Court has, vide its order dated 30.08.2019,directed the Rent Tribunal, Ajmer to decide the Eviction applicationpending before it within four months from the next date fixedbefore it.
For the reasons stated in the letter dated 05.08.2020, I amsatisfied that the Eviction Application could not be decided withinthe time granted by this Court for sufficient reasons. I, therefore,extend the time for disposal of the Eviction ApplicationNo.174/2012 pending before the Rent Tribunal, Ajmer by a further
period of four months from the date of receipt of certified copy ofthis order.
The Registry is directed to send a copy of this order to RentTribunal, Ajmer for necessary compliance.
(MAHENDAR KUMAR GOYAL),J
Manish/10
This page reproduces a public-domain court order (Section 52(1)(q)(iv), Copyright Act 1957). Explanations are EaseValue's original analysis. Always read the original order.
Disclaimer: General information only — not legal, tax or professional advice, and no advocate/CA–client relationship is created. AI-generated summaries may contain errors and must be verified against the original court order. EaseValue accepts no liability for reliance on this content. Not a solicitation.
Full disclaimer & Terms.