KALYAN SINGH Vs. SPECIAL JUDGE, MATHURA AND OTHERS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard Sri K. M. Tripathi holding the brief of learned Counsel for the Petitioner as well as Sri Ashish Kumar Srivastava for the caveator-Respondents.

(2.) Release application under Section 21(1) (a) was filed by Ashok Kumar son of Dayal Das under the U.P. Act No. 13 of 1972 which was registered as P.A. Case No. 20 of 2002 Ashok Kumar v. Laxman Singh and Ors. Dayal Das claimed himself to be the owner and landlord on the basis of the decree dated 31.5.2001 passed in Civil Suit No. 777 of 2000 as well as the order passed in Misc. Case No. 36 of 2001. Laxman Singh died during the pendency of the aforesaid P.A. Case No. 22 of 2000, therefore, the Respondent Nos. 3 and 4 who were legal heirs and representatives were substituted.

(3.) The contention of learned Counsel for the Petitioner is that no summons or notices were ever served upon the Petitioner Kalyan Singh son of Laxman Singh after having been substituted in the aforesaid P.A. case and as such he could not participate in the proceedings and that ultimately release application was allowed by the Prescribed Authority vide judgment and order dated 8.2.2005.