DEENA NATH UPADHYAY Vs. PRESCRIBED AUTHORITY

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard learned Counsel for the parties and perused the record.

(2.) Release Application No. 5 of 1999 ; Somaru Ram v. Deena Nath Upadhyaya and Ors., moved by the Respondents on 2.4.1999 was rejected on 11.3.2004 in default for nonappearance of the landlord. Thereafter, recall application was moved which was allowed on 2.2.2007 and the case was restored to its original number. Subsequently, the case was transferred on 18.1.2010 to the court of I Vth Civil Judge (Senior Division), Varanasi.

(3.) The contention of learned Counsel for the Petitioners is that the Presiding Officer namely I Vth Civil Judge (Senior Division), Varanasi took extraordinary interest in disposal of the P.A. Case No. 5 of 1999 for the reason that the residence of the Presiding Officer said to be at Allahabad, located next to the residence of the son of the landlord namely Dinesh Kumar Verma who is said to be studying in Agriculture Institute at Allahabad ; that the applicant was surprised to over-hear Dinesh Kumar Verma talking to his real brother inside his shop that he would manage to get an order in his favor in the case ; that this fact is affirmed by the conduct of the Presiding Officer who has been fixing dates at long interval in other cases, but is fixing in his P.A. Case No. 5 of 1999 short date.