Facts
The respondent/landlord filed an application for eviction and recovery of arrears of rent under Section 12(2) read with Section 11(a)(j) of Schedule 2 of the Chhattisgarh Rent Control Act, 2011 (“Act of 2011”)
Source reference: p. 2, para 2.1The landlord alleged that the petitioner/tenant had defaulted on the monthly rent of ₹8,000/- since October 2016
Source reference: p. 2, para 2.1On 21.02.2023, the Rent Controller proceeded ex-parte against the petitioner after they failed to appear for cross-examination
Source reference: p. 6, para 7The petitioner subsequently filed an application under Order 9 Rule 7 of the CPC to set aside the ex-parte order, followed by an application under Section 151 of the CPC on 18.03.2024, both of which were rejected by the Rent Controller and affirmed by the Rent Control Tribunal
Source reference: p. 5, para 6On 08.08.2024, the Rent Controller passed a final order of eviction
Source reference: p. 3, para 2.3The petitioner challenged this in an appeal which was dismissed by the Tribunal on 10.12.2025
Source reference: p. 1-2, para 1The petitioner now seeks to set aside these orders via a writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India
Source reference: p. 1, para 1Issues
1. Whether the impugned orders of eviction were vitiated by procedural irregularity due to the ex-parte proceedings and the rejection of the petitioner's application to set aside the ex-parte status.
Source reference: p. 3, para 32. Whether the findings regarding the landlord-tenant relationship and the default in rent payment were legally sustainable under the Act of 2011.
Source reference: p. 7-8, para 7Law Applied
The court primarily applied Section 12(2) and Section 11(a)(j) of Schedule 2 of the Chhattisgarh Rent Control Act, 2011, which govern the grounds for eviction and the rights of landlords
Source reference: p. 2, para 2.1The court also considered Order 9 Rule 7 of the Code of Civil Procedure (CPC) regarding the setting aside of ex-parte proceedings and Section 151 of the CPC regarding the inherent powers of the court
Source reference: p. 3, para 3; p. 5, para 6The principle that even if a party is proceeded ex-parte, they retain the right to participate in subsequent proceedings from the stage they appear, provided they do not seek to revert the clock without showing good cause
Source reference: p. 6, para 7Reasoning
The Court noted that despite being proceeded ex-parte, the petitioner had the legal right to join the proceedings at any stage but failed to effectively do so, leading the Court to conclude that the petitioner was "successfully lingering on the matter" for over seven years
Source reference: p. 6-7, para 7On the merits, the Court found that the Rent Controller had correctly established the landlord-tenant relationship and confirmed that the mandatory six-month notice had been served
Source reference: p. 7-8, para 7The default in rent since August 2017 was undisputed on the record
Source reference: p. 7, para 7The High Court scrutinized the petitioner’s conduct and found a persistent lack of diligence in participating in the proceedings. The record indicated that the petitioner failed to appear on multiple crucial dates, including 21.02.2023, 03.03.2023, 10.10.2023, and 14.12.2023
Source reference: p. 5-6, paras 6-7Holding
The High Court dismissed the writ petition, holding that there was no illegality or perversity in the concurrent findings of the Rent Controller and the Rent Control Tribunal
The Court affirmed the order of eviction and the recovery of arrears, ruling that the petitioner’s repeated defaults and failure to participate regularly in the trial justified the ex-parte finality
Source reference: p. 8, para 8The petition was dismissed with no order as to costs, and the lower court was directed to proceed with necessary actions
Source reference: p. 8, paras 8-9Original Court PDF
M/S MANNU MOTORSvsMANJEET SINGH RIHAL
Click to open original judgment
Original judgment, available to read, download and summarize on LawLens.in