GULSHAN SAHNI Vs. FAQUIR CHAND SAHNI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) By the present petition the petitioner seeks to impugn the order of the trial Court dated 17.10.2015. The petitioner had filed an Eviction Petition under Section 14(1) (e) read with Section 25-B of the Delhi Rent Control Act,1958. On 27.01.2014 when the application for leave to defend of the respondent was listed in Court the trial Court noted the contention of counsel for both the parties and allowed the application for leave to defend.

(2.) The petitioner thereafter on 28.2.2014 moved an application under order 47 Rule 1 CPC seeking review/modification of the order dated 27.1.2014. Alongwith the application the petitioner filed an affidavit of Mr.R.S.Malik, Advocate, i.e. counsel who had appeared for the petitioner on 27.1.2014. The affidavit states that during the course of arguments no consent was given by the learned counsel as recorded by the Court in its order dated 27.1.2014. The application also repeats the same averment. It states that on 27.1.2014 the matter was heard by the Court and Court kept the matter for orders on the said application. It further states that on 28.1.2014 the petitioner came to the Court to enquire about the order and was told that the application of the respondent seeking relief to defend was allowed by the Court. A certified copy was applied for on 30.1.2014 and was received on 5.2.2014 and it is stated that the petitioner came to know that the leave to defend application had been allowed on the alleged concession of the learned counsel for the parties.

(3.) By the impugned order dated 17.10.2015 the trial Court has dismissed the said review petition. The trial Court noted the submissions of the respondent that during the course of arguments learned counsel for the petitioner had given a consent and hence the Court did not reserve the order.