MAHMAD FARHANA Vs. STATE OF U. P.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record.

(2.) The present petition has been filed by the petitioner challenging the order dtd. 20/1/2025 whereby the stay application filed by the petitioner-tenant was rejected.

(3.) The facts in brief are that an order of eviction was filed against the petitioner vide order dtd. 7/10/2022. The petitioner challenged the said order by means of an appeal under Sec. 35 of U.P. Regulation of Urban Premises Tenancy Act, 2021. The appellate Court passed an order directing to deposit 50% of the amount decreed for entertaining the appeal vide order dtd. 29/11/2023. The said order was challenged by the petitioner by approaching this Court. Before this Court, the submission was made that the petitioner may be permitted to move a recall application, which was disposed of by this Court vide judgment dtd. 12/12/2023 holding that in case a recall application is filed, the District Judge shall