RAMJI GUPTA Vs. OM PRAKASH TRIPATHI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard learned Counsel for the parties and perused the record. It appears from the order dated 13.7.2009 that in view of the fact that point involved in this writ petition is similar and identical to that of Writ Petition No. 32591 of 2009. This writ petition was connected with the aforesaid writ petition No. 32591 of 2009 and an interim order was passed by His Lordship Hon. Pankaj Mithal, J. at the admission stage in the following terms.

(2.) The present writ petition No. 33870 of 2009 has come up for admission today along with the record of writ petition No. 32591 of 2009 in view of the order passed by the Court on 3.9.2010 thus:

(3.) A preliminary objection has been raised by Sri K.K. Tripathi, learned Counsel for the respondents, inter alia, that the petitioner has his own house which is clear from the findings recorded by the Courts below. In this view of the matter, the petitioner cannot remain as tenant in the house in dispute. He further submits that the Court in a similar issue and controversy involved in earlier writ petition No. 32591 of 2009, Kamla Devi v. Munni Devi and another has considered the question of acquiring a house in a vacant state by the tenant. He has placed reliance upon the following extract of the findings recorded by the Court below: