SURJEET KUMAR Vs. PRESCRIBED AUTHORITY

JUDGEMENT

(1.) FEELING aggrieved by an order passed by the Prescribed Authority whereunder it refused to set aside the exparte order passed by it, granting release of the accommodation in dispute in favour of the landlord Respondent No. 3, the Petitioner has approached this Court by means of this writ petition for redress seeking reversal of the said order.

(2.) THE brief facts, shorn of details and necessary for the disposal of the case are that in the proceedings for release of the accommodation in dispute initiated by the landlord Respondent No. 3 against the present Petitioner, the prescribed authority had passed an order on 18th October, 1989 fixing 24th October, 1989 for filing written statement. On this date, the presiding officer was on leave. In this circumstance, the matter appears to have been put up before the Incharge prescribed authority who passed an order where under the tenant opposite party could file written statement by 6 -11 -1989 on which date the Petitioner tenant did not appear and written statement was not filed. The Prescribed Authority ia these circumstances, passed on order directing that the case shall proceed exparte against the Petitioner and fixed 6 -12 -1989 for exparte evidence.

(3.) IT appears that the prescribed authority head the arguments of landlord Respondent No. 3 on 6 -12 -1989 and fixed 11 -12 1989 for delivery of judgment. It was at this stage that the Petitioner tenant appeared before the prescribed authority and moved an application praying for the recall of the order dated 6 -11 -1989 whereunder the said authority had ordered that the case shall proceed exparte against him. The reason disclosed in the aforesaid, application for the non appearance on 6 -11 -1989 was that instead of 6 -11 -1989, the clerk of the counsel for the Petitioner had noted 16 -11 -1989 and had communicated this date to be the date fixed for filing the written statement,