MAHESHWARI DEVI Vs. SANATAN DHARAM SABHA AND OTHERS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) HEARD learned coun­sel for the petitioner as well as Sri V K. Kohli, learned counsel for the respondent No. 1.

(2.) THE grievance of the learned coun­sel for the petitioner is that the exparte or­der was passed against him which has been affirmed by the appellate Court under Sec­tion 21(1) (b) of the U. P Act No. XII I of 1972, despite his application to leave to file the written statement and to lead his de­fence. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the finding recorded by the trial court as well as the appellate Court is not factually correct as the building is not in dilapidated condition. This was only defence to be led by him. This Court thinks it appropriate to examine the defence of the petitioner at this stage. In order to find out as to whether the building is in dilapi­dated condition or not, it is necessary to appoint an Advocate Commissioner, who shall visit the spot and may submit the re­port to this Court as to whether the build­ing is in dilapidated condition or not, at the cost of the petitioner.

(3.) PUT up this case of 12.4.2002. Till then the petitioner shall not be evicted from the disputed premises.