RAMESH CHAND Vs. GOPAL DAS TANEJA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) HEARD learned counsel for the parties.

(2.) BY means of this writ petition, the petitioner has sought writ in the nature of certiorari quashing the order dated 13.09.2006, passed by Judge Small Causes Court/Civil Judge (Sr. Div.), Udham Singh Nagar, passed in J.S.C.C. suit No. 03 of 2002 and also for quashing order dated 07.03.2007, passed by Judge Small Cause Court/District Judge, Udham Singh Nagar, in J.S.C.C. revision No. 25 of 2006 and further it is prayed to give direction to Judge Small Causes Court, Udham Singh Nagar to permit the petitioner to adduce evidence of the petitioners and to decide the case in accordance with law.

(3.) LEARNED counsel for the petitioner has informed to the Court that in terms of the interim order, passed by this Court, the petitioner was allowed to adduce evidence in defence and evidence has been filed by the petitioner/defendant by filing affidavits, concluded by the court. Now the case is fixed for cross examination of witnesses of petitioner/defendant by plaintiff/respondent. It is further submitted that the tenant has made delayed payment of the rent before the trial court. But this fact is not disputed that no representation for condoning the delay in payment of rent has been moved on behalf of the petitioner before Judge Small Causes Court.