BASANT RAM Vs. DEVI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Petitioners Basant Ram and others have filed the present revision petition directed against the order of the learned Rent Controller, Karnal dated 5-3-1999. By virtue of the impugned order, the learned Rent Controller allowed the application filed by the respondents for restitution of the possession. The petitioners were directed to restore and hand over the vacant possession of the premises within two months.

(2.) Some of the relevant facts can well be mentioned. One Mangal Dass had filed a petition for eviction for ejectment of Santu Ram alias Basant Ram. On 9-10-1993 the eviction application was allowed ex parte by the learned Rent Controller. Santu filed the application for setting aside the ex parte ejectment order. The same was dismissed on 27-1-1997. Aggrieved by the dismissal of the application seeking setting aside of the ex parte order, an appeal was preferred. On 25-9-1998 the learned Appellate Authority had set aside the ex parte order of eviction and accepted the application. During the pendency of the appeal, the landlord who filed the petition for eviction had sold the property. The learned Appellate Authority had remanded the case to the learned Rent Controller to decide the eviction application on merits. It appears that an application was made on behalf of the original landlord-owner withdrawing the eviction application. Respondents 1 to 4 filed an application under Section 144 of the Code of Civil Procedure against the petitioners seeking restitution of possession. It was asserted that since the order of eviction had been set aside, respondents 1 to 4 who had been dispossessed are entitled to restoration of possession. The learned Rent Controller vide the impugned order had allowed the said application. Aggrieved by the same, the present revision petition has been preferred.

(3.) Learned counsel for the petitioners at the outset urged that eviction application was withdrawn by the earlier landlord. He could not do so. To this respondents 1 to 4 through their counsel had stated that they had no objection in this regard. Accordingly, it is directed that on an appropriate application being filed before the learned Rent Controller, he will restore the petition.