RAZA HASAN Vs. RABAB SYEDA AND OTHERS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) A release application under section 21 of U.P. Act No. 13 of 1972 filed by landlord/respondent against tenant/petitioner in the form of R.C. Case No. 32 of 1999 was allowed ex -parte by the Prescribed Authority/A.C.M.M -VIII, Kanpur Nagar on 4.4.2002. On 3.5.2002 restoration application was filed by petitioner which was rejected on 10.2.2003. Thereafter, an appeal was filed by the petitioner on 3.3.2003 directed only against order dated 4.4.2002 passed by Prescribed Authority through which release application was allowed ex -parte. The appeal was accompanied by application for condonation of delay supported by an affidavit. The delay condonation application was rejected by Appellate Court on 4.3.2004 and appeal was dismissed as barred by time hence this writ petition. Heard learned Counsel for the petitioner and for landlord/respondent No. 1 who appeared through caveat. Learned Counsel for the land -lord/respondent No. 1 has stated that writ petition may finally be disposed of and he does not propose to file counter -affidavit.

(2.) IN my opinion, pendency of restoration application was good ground for condoning the delay: