AMI ADHAR NIDAR Vs. DISTRICT JUDGE MATHURA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) RAKESH Tiwari, J. Heard learned Counsel for the parties and perused the record.

(2.) THE petitioner claims that she was allotted premises in question vide order dated 1-1-2003 passed by the Rent Control and Eviction Officer/city Magistrate, Mathura. THE aforesaid order was challenged by landlord Sri Kapoor Chand Jain by filing a review application. THE review application appears to be still pending before the Rent Control and Eviction Officer/city Magistrate, Mathura.

(3.) AFTER hearing the Counsel for the parties I am of the opinion that condonation of delay is discretion of the Court based on its satisfaction as to whether sufficient cause for condonation of delay has been shown or not. Since it is discretionary matter and the Court having been satisfied that sufficient cause has been shown for condonation of delay no interference is required in the impugned order as legality of the order is not involved. 6. For the reasons stated above, the writ petition is dismissed. .