PREM CHAND YADAV Vs. ABHILASH PANDEY AND ANOTHER

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Prem Chand Yadava has filed the present writ petition and challenges the order in case No. 6 of 1990; Prem Chand Yadav v. Ram Abhilash Pandey dated 10 December 1990 by which it appears an application under Order IX Rule 13 of the Civil Procedure Code was rejected. The only argument made by the learned counsel for the petitioner before this court is that is one as on a mercy petition that Prem Chand Yadava be granted an indulgence to vacate the accommodation on such time as this court may grant. No other argument was placed before the Court. The Court would have considered this prayer for indulgence but is unable to do so after having perused the order dated December 10, 1990. It is not disputed that the impugned order placed facts on record to the effect that initially when summons were attempted to be served on Prem Chand Yadava as a co-defendant his submission before the trial court was that he had been wrongly impleaded as a defendant in the suit and should he be impleaded as a party then it would tantamount to harassment as he has nothing to do with the accommodation in dispute, as he has at no stage occupied it. In these circumstances if the court were to make the mistake or granting and indulgence to the petitioner by giving an extended time to clear the accommodation it would indirectly amount to accepting that be was validly occupying the accommodation. He has acquiesced to the position that he was never in the accommodation. Thus, the question of granting any time to the petitioner does not arise and this was a misplaced writ petition as the petitioner is nothing but a trespasser on his own submission before the court below.

(2.) The petition is dismissed.