MOHAMMED SHAFI Vs. ABDUL WAHID

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Shri A. K. Chitale, learned Sr. Counsel with Shri S. Kochatta, counsel for the petitioner.

(2.) In brief, the review petitioner was defendant in Civil Suit No. 164-A/2002 filed by the respondent seeking eviction from the tenanted premises under the provisions of M. P. Accommodation Control Act, 1961. The suit was opposed by the petitioner inter alia on the ground that no landlord tenant relationship exist and he was the owner of the suit premises. The trial Court had decreed the suit on the ground of denial of title. The first appellate Court had allowed the appeal and dismissed the suit on the ground that the relationship of landlord-tenant was not established. The Second Appeal No. 1307/2005 has been allowed by the learned Single Judge recording concession of the counsel for petitioner and granting time to the petitioner to vacate the suit premises. In view of the fact that the learned Single Judge who had passed the said judgment has demitted the office, the present review petition is placed before the Division Bench in terms of Rule 13(l)(b)(ii)(l) of Chapter IV of the High Court of M. P. Rules, 2008.

(3.) Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that this Court has wrongly recorded the concession of the counsel for petitioner, though no such concession was given by him as is apparent from his affidavits. He further submitted that the circumstances of the case also demonstrated that there was no occasion to give such a concession. He has further submitted that the matter was not listed for final hearing, yet it was heard finally and that, the judgment in the Second Appeal is not in accordance with section 100 of the Civil Procedure Code and Order 23, Rule 3, Civil Procedure Code. He further submitted that the factual finding cannot be recorded on the basis of concession and that the undertaking given by the petitioner in pursuance to the judgment in Second Appeal would not affect his right to pursue the review petition.