KHURSHID JAHAN Vs. PRESCRIBED AUTHORITY KANPUR NAGAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) B. K. Singh, J. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri Iqbal Ahmad for the respondent No. 2. Sri Sharad Kumar Srivastava has also put in appearance on behalf of respondent No. 3.

(2.) THE learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the finding recorded by the Prescribed Authority, Kanpur Nagar that in the disputed premises the Respondent No. 2 was living as tenant when the alleged ex pane judgment was put to execution is materially illegal.

(3.) THE learned counsel for respondent No. 2, the main contestant of the claim of the petition submitted that the lower court has considered the evidence led by the parties. THE same has correctly been appreciated. THE learned counsel has pointed out that the corrected voter list of 1993, the ration card of the respondent No. 2 from the house in question, bank pass book and T. V. receipts have been considered to hold that the respondent No. 2 was in possession of the house in question.