AKRAM ALI Vs. DILAWAR KHAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS application arises out of proceedings for eviction taken before the Rent Controlling Authority under Section 23 of the Madhya Pradesh Accommodation Control Act.

(2.) THIS applicant is a tenant. The non-applicant filed an application for his ejectment from the suit accommodation. Writ of summons was served on the applicant on 3.6.1984 and he appeared on 5.6.1984, the date on which the case was fixed before the Rent Controlling Authority. As the Presiding Officer was on leave, the hearing was adjourned on 28.6.1984. On that date the applicant filed his written statement and also made an application supported by affidavit for condoning the delay, as according to him, he could not file that written statement within time prescribed under Section 23(g) for various reasons mentioned in that application. That application was naturally opposed. By the impugned order the Rent Controlling Authority stated the case of the parties are in one line made its decision saying that leave to defend cannot be granted.

(3.) THE revision is allowed, the impugned order is set aside. It is directed that the Rent Controlling Authority shall decide whether the applicant had sufficient cause in approaching that Authority after lapse of statutory period provided under Section 23(c) of the Act in obtaining leave. If the answer to this question is in the favour of the applicant and the Authority is of opinion that the delay can be condoned, then it shall proceed to decide whether the applicant has disclosed tenable grounds to raise a probable defence to the action for ejectment, and then decide whether leave to defend should be granted. Under the circumstances, the parties are directed to bear their own costs. Revision Allowed.