RAVINDRA JAIN Vs. SMT. GEETA DEVI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard Sri M.D. Mishra, learned counsel for the petitioner-appellant/defendant/tenant and Sri K.K. Tiwari, learned counsel for respondent/plaintiff/landlord.

(2.) This petition has been filed under Art. 227 of the Constitution of India praying to set aside the order dated 22.07.2017 in Rent Control Appeal No. 5 of 2016 (Ravindra Jain and Anr Vs. Smt. Geeta Sahu) passed by the court of Additional District Judge, Court No. 6, Jhansi whereby the application 18-C(2) filed by the petitioner herein for appointment of Ameen Commissioner has been rejected.

(3.) Submission of learned counsel for the petitioner is that the court below has committed manifest error of law in rejecting the application 18-C(2), inasmuch as, by allowing the application best evidence could have been gathered with the help of Ameen Commissioner with respect to the situation of the tenanted premises. In support of his submission, he relied upon a decision of Lucknow Bench of this Court in the case of New Meena Sahkari Awas Samiti Ltd. Lucknow through its President Vs. Addl. District Judge, Court No. 2, Lucknow and Ors. 2016 (2) ARC 133.