GOPAL YADAV Vs. SPECIAL JUDGE ANTICORRUPTION

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard Sri Ajay Kumar Singh, learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri Faheem Ahmad, advocate on behalf of respondent Nos. 2 and 3 and perused the record.

(2.) Gopal Yadav, tenant-petitioner, has approached this Court by filing present writ petition under Article 226, Constitution of India, seeking to challenge judgment and order dated August 22, 2001 (Annexure-1 to the writ petition) passed in S.C.C. Revision No. 17 of 1999 passed by Additional District and Sessions Judge, Varanasl, exercising revisional jurisdiction under Section 25, Provincial Small Causes Court Act, whereby the revision filed by landlord-plaintiff/respondent Nos. 2 and 3 was allowed the judgment and order dated 30.1.1999 passed by Judge Small Causes Court in J.S.C.C. Suit No. 18 of 1987, Naseem Ahmad v. Gopal Yadav, was modified and the said suit was dismissed to the extent of the relief sought by the plaintiff for evicting the tenant-petitioner (Annexure-4 to the writ petition).

(3.) The tenant-petitioner had earlier filed Writ Petition No. 4587 of 2001. Gopal Yadav v. Special Judge (A.C.)/Additional District and Sessions Judge. Varanasi--(exercising powers of revisional court under Section 25, Provincial Small Causes Court Act) against the revisional judgment and order dated 4.11.2000. This writ petition was allowed by this Court vide judgment and order dated 12.2.2001 with the direction to the revisonal court to decide afresh specifying separately different heads under which deposit is to be made towards 'cost of the suit' contemplated under Section 20 (4) of the U. P. Urban Buildings (Regulation of Letting, Rent and Eviction) Act, 1972. U. P. Act No. XIII of 1972 (for short called 'the Act'). The revisional court, in compliance to the said judgment and order dated 12.2.2001 decided the revision afresh, the present impugned judgment and order dated 22.8.2001 (Annexure-1 to the writ petition).