UNION OF INDIA Vs. KHALID ABDULLAH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) LEARNED Single Judge finding that there were two conflicting single judge decisions of this court on the point in issue referred the matter to the Hon'ble Chief Justice for constituting a Division Bench to hear this revision and this is how this case has come before this Bench.

(2.) THE Union of India being tenant lost ejectment suit before the court of Judge, Small Causes against which revision Civil Revision under Section 25 of the Provincial Small Causes Courts Act was preferred before this court. In the said revision the court held that there was no good ground for interfering with the finding recorded by the trial court. It appears that the main question pressed before the learned single Judge was whether a composite notice under Section 106 of Transfer of Property Act and Section 80 CPC could be validly issued for maintaining a civil suit. In Union of India v. Sahu Ram Rakshpal, (1979) UPRCC 52 Hon'ble K. N. Singh J. held that a composite notice could validly be issued. While in the case of Union of India v. Chandra Kishore Agarwal, 1981 ARC 319 Hon'ble K. M. Dayal J. took a contrary view. But in the later case the earlier case was not taken note of and if the same was taken note of, the case would have been referred to a Division Bench. In the case of Union of India v. Chandra Kishore Agarwal (supra) the learned Judge held :-