JAI KISHAN GOSWAMI Vs. DISTRICT AND SESSIONS JUDGE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) SHRI Suresh Chandra Jain is the landlord of the premises in dispute. One Shri Sardar Preetam Singh was the tenant. He had made certain constructions and sub -let to different persons. The landlord filed a suit for viction or Sardar Preetam Singh which was decreed ex -parte. This ex -parte decree has been maintained. Subsequently, when the landlord proceeded for execution or his decree Sardar Preetam Singh and the sub -tenants filed objection. These objections were initially accepted by the trial Court. Thereafter the landlord's revision was allowed on 17.2.86. The tenant as well as sub -tenant filed a writ petition in this Court. The writ petition filed by the Sardar Preetam Singh was dismissed but the writ petition filed by sub -tenants was allowed. The landlord took the matter before the Supreme Court and the Supreme Court by its order dated 20.11.98 allowed the appeal and set aside the order of this Court and restored the order of the Revisional Court on dated 19.2.86. Shri Jai Kishan Goswami is also one of the sub -tenant and was the party before the Supreme Court. Before the Supreme Court sub -tenants including the petitioner prayed that they may be granted 3 months time to shift to another place. This was granted to them. Thereafter when they did not shift, the execution proceedings were started by the landlord. The trial Court by the order dated 2.8.99 has accepted the execution application of the landlord hence the present writ petition by the petitioner.

(2.) THE Counsel for the petitioner has argued that before passing the impugned order dated 2.8.99 copy of the application filed by the landlord has not been given to him and as such the order is illegal. Petitioner is also one or the sub -tenant and was a party before the Supreme Court and his Counsel has also given a statement that they will shift to a alternative place for which they may be granted 3 months time which was allowed to them. The petitioner has no right left. This petition has no merit. It is hereby dismissed.