RAM PRAKASH Vs. ADDITIONAL DISTRICT JUDGE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This writ petition has been filed by the petitioner for quashing the impugned order dated 15.02.2011 passed by the Additional District Judge (Court No.12), Lucknow in S.C.C.Revision No. 3 of 2010 whereby the application moved by him for admitting the additional evidence has been rejected and also for quashing the order dated 01.11.2012 whereby his application for review of the aforesaid order has also been rejected.

(2.) Brief facts of the case are that the SCC Suit no.99 of 1999 was originally filed by the father of the respondent nos. 3 to 6, the land-lord of the disputed house for recovery of the arrears of rent and ejectment of the petitioner-tenant therefrom. It was decreed by the trial court in favour of the respondent nos. 3 to 6. Thereafter, the SCC Revision no. 3 of 2010 was preferred by the petitioner before the lower court challenging the said decree and during its pendency an application for admitting additional evidence was moved by him for filing a certified copy of the assessment list of Nagar Nigam under Order 41 Rule 27 read with Section 151 of the Code of Civil Procedure to show that the rate of rent was Rs.17/- per month and not Rs.70/- per month as was being claimed by the land-lords. The said application was rejected by the learned Additional District Judge by his impugned order dated 15.02.2011 inter-alia on the ground that the said document was received by the revisionist way back in the year 1998 and that he was not shown in it as a tenant. Instead, his brother was shown as a tenant and that too at the rate of rent of Rs.15/- per month and that the revisionist no where in his written statement had stated that either he was living with his brother or the rate of rent was Rs.15/- per month. The application by the petitioner-revisionist to recall the said order dated 15.02.2011 was also dismissed by his second impugned order dated 01.11.2012 on the ground that there was no error apparent on the face of the record in his order dated 15.02.2011. Aggrieved against the aforesaid impugned orders, the petitioner has filed the instant writ petition as already mentioned above.

(3.) The affidavits and counter affidavits have already been exchanged between the parties and this writ petition is being finally disposed of with the consent of the learned counsel for the parties at admission stage itself.