AKULA RANGAIAH Vs. RAM BARAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The landlord files an application for eviction and the samewas ordered. The appellate court also confirmed the same. On revision this Court also confirmed the order and granted three months time to the tenant to deliver the possession of the premises. The landlord filed an application on 21-7-1989 and got the same executed on the very same day. The order of the Supreme Court also was directed to be communicated by telegram. That was not communicated and ultimately the court passed the order. Thd tenant filed an application to the Rent Controller for re-delivery of possession.

(2.) We are not concerned with the merits of the case as contended byboth the parties. We have to consider whether the landlord is entitled to file an application on 21-7-1989, and the lower court is competent to deliver possession in spite of the direction given by the High Court granting three months time for vacating the premises. As the lower court ordered re-delivery, the landlord filed the present revision petition.

(3.) The contention of the landlord is that the day on which theorder has been passed should not be excluded and if that day has not been excluded, he is within time.