DEVIKA Vs. AMARJEET AHUJA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) A tenant in common, who having evaded service of eviction petition was proceeded against ex parte, chose to move an application for setting aside ex parte order at the stage, when evidence of landlord was over and evidence of the other tenants in common (none else but her real mother and brother) was at last leg. This application for setting aside the ex parte proceedings alongwith the application seeking condonation of delay have been dismissed by the learned Rent Controller. Hence, instant revision petition has been preferred.

(2.) Facts may be noticed:-

(3.) Heard Mr. Sumit Sood, learned counsel for the petitioner (tenant-respondent No.3) and Mr. Neeraj Gupta, learned senior counsel, for respondent No.1(landlord) and gone through the record. Respondents No.2 and 3 the mother and brother of present petitioner, who were represented by Mr. Sumit Sood, before the learned Rent Controller are not represented here. Respondent No.3 stands served, however, has chosen not to appear. In respect of service of respondent No.2, the report is that she was not found at premises in question. Premises are the same where she was served before the learned Rent Controller. In the facts and circumstances, where impugned order has not been passed against the interest of respondents No.2 and 3, but against the petitioner-daughter, therefore present petition is taken up for hearing. The record of eviction petition was requisitioned in this revision petition vide order dated 1.12.2017 and for the last two years eviction proceedings have remained stayed.