MATHURA SINGH Vs. ADDITIONAL JUDGE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) By means of this writ petition, the petitioner-landlord has sought for writ in the nature of certiorari quashing the order dated 20.05.2011, passed by learned Additional Judge, Small Causes-II, Lucknow in Misc. Case No.7 C of 2010.

(2.) Heard learned counsel for both the parties and have gone through the records.

(3.) The brief facts, relevant for the purposes of deciding this writ petition, are that the landlord moved release application under Section 21(1)(a) of the U.P. Act No.XIII of 1972, which was registered as P.A. Case No.18 of 2005, which was ultimately ex-parte allowed vide judgment and order dated 24.07.2010. The mischievous tenant was represented by Sri D.K. Srivastava, Advocate. The case was transferred from one Court to another. Taking undue advantage of transfer of the case, the tricky tenant did not bother to ensure as to what was happening in his case, disappeared and, when he was sought to be evicted, he moved an application for recall of the ex-parte judgment and order and, also filed an appeal before the learned District Judge. He, again played mischief and thrown a challenge to the entire judicial system by getting him represented through Sri Ram Karan Agrawal, Advocate and sought withdrawal of the Rent appeal no.52 of 2010, which was ultimately allowed and the appeal was dismissed as withdrawn, vide order dated 15.10.2012. By adopting this dirty trick, he has got reserved, the right to knock the door of the learned appellate Court for disposal of his application and for setting aside the judgement and order. This withdrawal application was a camouflage, with the hidden agenda, to linger on and delay the disposal of the case.