Laxmi Kumar Jaiswal vs XVth ADJ Kanpur Nagar & Ors.

S.P. Mehrotra, J.—Present Writ Petition has been filed by the petitioner under Article 226 of the Constitution of India inter alia, praying for quashing the order datd 7102003 (Annexure No. 4 to the Writ Petition) passed by the learned Additional District Judge, Court No. 15, Kanpur Nagar on an explanation (Paper No. 51 Ga2) filed in Rent Appeal No. 156 of 1998.

The dispute relates to an accommodation on the ground floor of Premises No. 29/20, Beldari Mohal, Kanpur Nagar. The said accommodation has hereinafter been referred as the �disputed accommodation�.

From a perusal of the Writ Petition and the Annexures thereto, it appears that the respondent No. 2 filed a release application under Section 21(1)(a) of the U.P. Act No. XIII of 1972 (in short �the Act�) against the petitioner for the release of the disputed accommodation. The said release application was registered as Rent Case No. 36 of 1995. Copy of the said release application has been filed as Annexure No. 1 to the Writ Petition.

It further appears that the petitioner contested the said release application and filed his written statement, copy whereof has been filed as Annexure No. 2 to the Writ Petition.

It further appears that by the order dated 1881998, the Prescribed Authority allowed the said release application filed by respondent No. 2. Thereupon, it appears that the petitioner filed an Appeal under Section 22 of the Act which was registered as Rent Appeal No. 156 of 1998.

It further appears that during the pendency of the said Rent Appeal No. 156 of 1998, the petitioner filed an application dated 752003/172003 (Paper No. 51 Ga2), inter alia, praying for being permitted to make amendments in his said written statement. Copy of the said amendment application (Paper No. 51 Ga2) has been filed as Annexure No. 3 to the Writ Petition.

By the order dated 7102003 (Annexure No. 4 to the Writ Petition), the learned Additional Distgrict Judge, Court No. 15, Kanpur Nagar (Appellate Authority) rejected the said amendment application (Paper No. 51 Ga2) filed on behalf of the petitioner.

Thereafter, the petitioner has filed the present Writ Petition seeking the reliefs mentioned above.

I have heard Sri Y.K. Saxena, Advocate, holding brief for Sri S.K. Nigam, learned counsel for the petitioner, and perused the record.

From the above narration of the facts, it is evident that the order dated 7102003 (Annexure No. 4 to the Writ Petition) impugned in the present Writ Petition is an interlocutory order passed during the pendency of the said Rent Appeal No. 156 of 1998. It will be open to the petitioner to challenge the said dated 7102003 (Annexure No. 4 to the Writ Petition), in case the final decision in the said Rent Appeal No. 156 of 1998 goes against the petitioner, and the petitioner challenges such final decision before this Court.

In the circumstances, without going into the merits of the impugned order dated 7102003 (Annexure No. 4 to the Writ Petition). I am of the opinion that no interference is called for with the said impugned order dated 7102003 at this stage.

In view of the aforesaid, the Writ Petition is dismissed subject to the observations made above.