SUBODH Vs. SPECIAL JUDGE AND 4 OTHERS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard Sri Dharmpal Singh, learned Senior Advocate, assisted by Sri Anshu Chaudhary, learned counsel for the defendant-tenant/petitioner.

(2.) This petition has been filed praying for the following relief:

(3.) Learned counsel for the defendant-tenant/petitioner submits that the plaintiff-landlords/respondents have a shop at Maksudpura in which the plaintiff-respondent nos. 4 and 5 are running a hair cutting Saloon. At the stage of the appeal certain photographs were filed in additional evidence alongwith an application but the application was rejected by the appellate court vide order dated 16.1.2018. The rejection of the application for additional evidence was wholly arbitrary and illegal. If those evidences would have been taken into consideration then the bonafide need as set up by the plaintiff-landlords, could not have been accepted. He, therefore, submits that both the impugned judgments are erroneous and, therefore, deserve to be set aside.