LAL BAHADUR Vs. ADDL. DISTT. JUDGE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) List revised. No one appears for the contesting respondents. Heard Shri. U.S. Sahai learned counsel for the tenant petitioner. Due to fire in rent control section some files were burnt. As computer was showing this case to be pending hence duplicate skeleton file was constituted and the case was listed on 11.09.2013. On the said date the case was adjourned to 25.09.2013 and learned counsel for the petitioner was directed to supply duplicate copies of the writ petition, counter affidavit and rejoinder affidavit etc. Learned counsel for the petitioner supplied the requisite duplicate copies on 11.09.2013 which are treated to be original.

(2.) On 11.09.2013 learned counsel for the petitioner had further stated that sole petitioner had died. However in respect of sole petitioner application had already been filed in 1997.The same is included in the duplicate copies supplied by the learned counsel for the petitioner. Through the said application substitution of Sanjay Srivastava and Ajay Srivastava sons of deceased petitioner and of Smt. Sarla Srivastava widow of deceased petitioner was sought. It is assumed that the said application was allowed.

(3.) On 31.10.2013 substitution application to bring on record legal representatives of opposite party Nos. 2, 3, and 4 was filed, notices were issued, however no one appeared on behalf of the legal representatives of opposite party numbers 2, 3, and 4. Accordingly the said substitution application is allowed after condoning the delay in filing the same.