GOGO RANI Vs. STATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Alongwith a petition moved in October G 1992 undersections 14 and 17 of the Arbitration Act, there was an interim application bearing No. 73757 of 1992 on which an exparte order was passed on January 21, 1993. The order was as under : IA 13757192 Notice to respondent No. 1 for 6-5-1993. Meanwhile, the said respondent is restrained from interfering in any manner with the exclusive peaceful possession and enjoyment of the premises bearing No. WZ 8-A, Kirti Nagar, New Delhi. Petitioner to comply with the provisions of Order 39 rule 3, Civil Procedure Code within a week. Dasti."

(2.) Consequent upon service of the order so passed, the respondent moved an application for its vacation. It is that application (IA 2948193) which has led to this order.

(3.) Before I come into grip with the arguments advanced, a brief commentary on the backdrop may be needed. Here it is.