TIPUL CHAND Vs. IIND ADDL DISTRICT JUDGE FATEHPUR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) S. U. Khan, J. This writ petition has been filed by a person whom plaintiff/respondent-landlord claimed to be sub- tenant while he himself claimed that he was not residing in the accommodation in dispute. Landlord- respondents 3 to 5 filed suit for eviction against Respondent No. 6 Bipul Chand and petitioner Tipul Chand (since deceased and survived by legal representatives ). In the suit it was alleged that Respondent No. 6 was chief-tenant and he had sub-let the accommodation in dispute to the petitioner. Accommodation in dispute was in the nature of Dalan. Learned Counsel for the petitioner states that petitioner was never tenant of the termination in dispute. Suit was registered as case (SCC Suit) No. 7 of 1981, JSCC, Fatehpur dismissed the suit on 25-10-1985 on the ground that notice of accommodation of tenancy was invalid. Landlords filed SCC Revision No. 129 of 1985. IInd A. D. J. , Fatehpur on 4-1-1986 allowed the revision, set aside the judgment and decree passed by the Trial Court and decreed the suit with cost for ejectment of the respondents and for recovery of Rs. 180/- as arrears of rent and pendente lite and future damages for use and occupation at the rate of Rs. 5/- per month. This writ petition is directed against the said order of the Revisional Court dated 4-1-1986.

(2.) THE Court enquired from the learned Counsel for the petitioner as to why this writ petition had been filed by the petitioner when according to him he was never in possession of the property in dispute. Learned Counsel for the petitioner stated that petitioner was mainly aggrieved by award of damages. Learned Counsel for landlord-respondent Shri K. S. Chauhan clearly stated that landlords were ready to give up their right to recover the arrears of rent from the petitioner (which term includes the legal representatives ).