INTKHAP BANO Vs. KRISHNA GOPAL AND ANOTHER

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Counter affidavit has been filed by Sri Siddharth Verma, learned Counsel for the respondents today in Court. Smt. Rama Goel 'Banshal' learned Counsel for the petitioner states that she does not propose to file any rejoinder affidavit as the averments made in the counter affidavit are based on record and that the matter may be decided on merit.

(2.) Heard learned Counsel for the parties and perused the record.

(3.) Brief facts of the case are that respondent No. 1 Krishna Gopal filed JSCC Suit No. 12 of 1997 before the Judge Small Causes Court, Bareilly against the petitioner for eviction from the disputed shop on the ground of arrears of rent. It was alleged in the suit that one Intizam Ali was the original tenant and he has removed his effect from the shop in dispute and is permanently residing at Pakistan and Smt. Intkhab Bano is only an agent of Intizam All, hence she has no right to occupy the shop in dispute or to give possession of the same to her son, respondent No. 2.