NISHITH KUMAR BIRLA Vs. MASHRRAT HUSAIN AND ANR.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned counsel appearing for respondents

(2.) By means of this writ petition the order of the revisional court dated 28.10.2013 has been challenged by which the decree of the trial court dated 28.5.2013 was set-aside. A suit was filed under Sec. 20 of the U.P. Urban Buildings (Regulation of Letting, Rent and Eviction) Act, 1972 (in short the Act) by the landlord. The said suit was tried and was dismissed by decree dated 17.9.2010 against which the landlord-respondent filed a revision being Revision No. 4 of 2011 before the Additional District Judge, Court No.1, Agra.

(3.) After filing of the revision it appears that an application has been filed by the landlord stating therein that the tenants-defendants had purchased a separate property and, therefore, they are not entitled to the benefit of Sec. 20(4) of the said Act. The said application was contested and the revisional court remanded the matter to the trial court directing that in view of the new evidence brought before the court, the trial court to decide the question with regard to the benefit in view of proviso to sub-section (4) of Sec. 20 of the Act. The matter was remanded to the trial court by order dated 17.10.2012. At that stage the respondent-landlord filed an application that the entire matter be heard afresh. The defendant-tenant objected to the same that in the trial proceedings 9 issues were framed and were decided and at the revisional court level the additional evidence was brought on record and, therefore, only to that extent the matter has been remanded back to the trial court to decide the question of the new material being brought on record and, therefore, the entire matter need not be heard and only to the extent of new evidence be considered and decided. The trial court allowed the application of the landlord by order dated 28.5.201 The tenant-petitioner then filed a revision against the said order, which revision has also been rejected. Hence, this writ petition by the tenant.