RAMESHWAR DAYAL Vs. HARNATH SINGH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) RAKESH Tiwari, J. This case was listed on an application No. 229309 of 2006 moved by Sri B. N. Agarwal and Sanjay Agarwal, Advocates, Counsel for the petitioners after service on one Sri R. P. Tiwari, Advocate, inter alia. On 20-5-2003 the case had been admitted and notices were issued to respondent tenants'. They had taken steps in time and notices which had been served on the respondents but counter-affidavit has not been filed so far.

(2.) AN order dated 10-11-2006 was passed enhancing the rent of the accommodation in dispute.

(3.) IT is urged by Sri V. K. S. Chaudhary, learned Senior Advocate assisted by Sri N. K. Saxena and Sri Deepak Saxena that the Counsels for the respondents had no notice of the case as the application No. 229309 of 2006 for listing of the case was served on one Sri R. P. Tiwari who is not a Counsel for the respondents. In paragraph 6 of the affidavit filed alongwith the recall application No. 265974/06, it is averred that on 10- 11-2006 one Sri P. K. Singh, Advocate, informed him by the deponent of the affidavit i. e. Clerk, to Sri N. K. Saxena, during the lunch recess that some order has been passed in one of the case of Sri Deepak Saxena, Advocate which was listed in Court No. 7 and has gone unattended. IT is also averred that on checking the cause list dated 10-11-2006 he found that the aforesaid writ petition was listed on serial No. 2 but was not marked by him as such he immediately made enquiries from the reader regarding the orders passed in the case and came to know that rents has been enhanced by the order dated 10-11- 2006.