RAM KISHUN PAL Vs. SHAMBHU LAL SAHU

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Service of notice upon the respondent is deemed to be sufficient in view of the office report dated 11.7.2014 but no one has put in appearance on his behalf.

(2.) Petitioner, who is landlord, moved application for recall of the said order on the ground that it has been passed without notice or opportunity of hearing to him. The said application has been rejected on 21.5.2014 without recording any finding as to whether any notice was duly served upon the petitioner or not.

(3.) Thus, the petitioner has preferred this writ petition challenging both the orders dated 23.3.2013 and the order dated 21.5.2014 by which his recall application has been rejected.