GITA DEVI BAGARIA Vs. SIBROTI SHAW

JUDGEMENT

(1.) In view of the order proposed to be made, no previous service is required to be effected on the opposite party. The petitioner will, however, remain obliged to immediately forward a copy of the petition along with a copy of this order to the opposite party.

(2.) The grievance of the petitioner is that despite the petitioner asserting before the appellate court that the petitioner had been dispossessed pursuant to an ex parte ad interim order obtained in the appeal, the appellate court declined to go into the matter while rendering the final order and dismissing the appeal.

(3.) The petitioner claims to be the tenant who was in occupation of the suit premises at the time of the institution of the suit. The plaintiff has claimed that the petitioner herein had surrendered possession of the tenanted premises. Curiously and despite such assertion, the suit has been filed apparently to restrain the tenant from creating third party rights in respect of the suit properties or otherwise dealing with the same.