RAMJI LAL VARSHNEY Vs. ADDITIONAL DISTRICT JUDGE ALIGARH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This writ petition is directed against the order passed by the Rent Control and Eviction Officer declaring the disputed accommodation as vacant on 30.4.1981 and thereafter rejecting the application of the landlord-petitioners for the release of the disputed accommodation on 10.10.1983, and allotting the same to respondent No. 3, on 19,10.1983 and the order of the revisional authority dated 20.7.1984, affirming the said order in revision.

(2.) The dispute relates to House No. 1886, Mendu Gate. Hathras, district Aligarh. One Ram Babu and Smt. Bhu Devi were owners of this property. Har Prasad was a tenant of two rooms of first floor of the disputed house. Ram Babu and Smt, Bhu Devl filed Suit No. 98 of 1975 for recovery of arrears of rent, ejectment and damages against their tenant Har Prasad. The suit was decreed on 3.4.1979 and thereafter the landlords obtained possession of the portion in occupation of their tenant Har Prasad. Klshan Slngh, respondent No. 3 filed an application for allotment of the said portion of the disputed house on 19.11.1979. The Rent Control and Eviction Officer asked the Rent Control Inspector to submit a report. He submitted a report on 10.12.1979 stating that the landlords had obtained the possession of the disputed house from Har Prasad and the same be treated as a vacant. The Rent Control and Eviction Officer issued notice to Ram Babu and Smt. Bhu Devi but as they were not served, he directed the service by publication. Ram Babu and Smt. Bhu Devi, the erstwhile owners of the property, sold the disputed house to Ramji Lal Varshney, and his wife Smt. Bahutl Devi alias Laxmi Devl, petitioner Nos. 1 and 2 respectively by registered sale deed on 29.4.1981, and delivered the possession of the said house to them.

(3.) The Rent Control and Eviction Officer declared the disputed accommodation as vacant on 30.4.1981. Respondent No. 3 filed an application on 13.5.1981, stating that the erstwhile owners of the property had sold the property to the petitioners and notices may be Issued to them. The petitioners, on coming to know the order of vacancy, filed objection on 5.6.1981 stating that the previous landlords had sold the property to them and they were in ita possession. The house was never vacant. On 24.6.1981, they filed another application again taking the objection against the vacancy and further praying that the disputed house be released in their favour. The Rent Control and Eviction Officer maintained the order declaring the vacancy and rejected the application filed by the petitioners for release on 10.10.1983 and, thereafter, passed an order directing for allotment of the disputed house to respondent No. 3 on 19.10.1983. The petitioners, aggrieved against these two orders, filed two separate revisions before the District Judge. Respondent No. 1 has dismissed the revisions by the impugned order dated 20.7.1984.