(1.) HEARD counsel for the parties and perused the record.
(2.) SCC Suit No. 91 of 1998 was filed by the Plaintiffs Respondents against the Petitioner tenant on the ground that he is a defaulter in payment of rent of the shop in dispute which was taken by him at the rate of Rs. 200/ - per month. The Petitioner tenant contested the suit by filing his written statement interalia that SCC Suit filed by the Plaintiffs Respondents was not covered by the provisions of Uttar Pradesh Urban Buildings (Regulation of Letting, Rent And Eviction) Act, 1972 ( hereinafter referred to as the U.P. Act No. 13 of 1972) whereas the case of the landlords in the court below was that the building was covered by U.P. Act No. 13 of 1972.
(3.) AGGRIEVED by the order aforesaid, Revision No. 138 of 2005 was filed by the Petitioner challenging rejection of his application under Order 7 Rule 11 Code of Civil Procedure This application was objected upon by the landlords on the ground of being time barred. The Additional District & Sessions Judge, Court No. 5, Meerut rejected the revision of the Petitioner as barred by time vide judgment and order dated 17.2.2011.