SHAIL VARSHNEY Vs. M/S. ADHUNIK PARIDHAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) SUPPLEMENTARY affidavit filed today be taken on record.

(2.) FROM a perusal of the writ petition and the annexures thereto, it appears that Jagdish Saran, the predecessor -in -interest of the petitioner filed an application under section 30(2) of the Act, inter alia, praying for permission to make deposit of rent in respect of the disputed shop. The said application was registered as Misc. Case No. 84 of 1991. Copy of the said application under section 30(2) of the Act is annexed as Annexure -1 to the writ petition.

(3.) IT was, inter alia, stated in the said objections that an oral settlement had been arrived at in the month of August, 1988, and after the said oral settlement, the respondent Nos. 2, 4 and 5 had no concern with the disputed shop; and that after the said settlement, only respondent No. 3 (Anil Agarwal) was the sole owner and landlord of the disputed shop; and that whatever rent had been received by the respondent No. 3 (Anil Agarwal), since August 1988, had been received by him as the sole owner and landlord of the disputed shop.