Ram Narayan Mathur vs IXth Additional District Judge,Kanpur Nagar & Ors.

S. P. Mehrotra, J.—The present writ petition has been filed by the petitioner under Articles 226/227 of the Constitution of India, interalia, praying for quashing the order dated 5 112003 (Annexure 5 to the writ petition) passed by the learned IXth Additional District Judge, Kanpur Nagar (Appellate Authority) on an application (Paper No. 13 Ga) filed in Rent Appeal No. 51 of 2001.

The dispute relates to all accommodation on the first floor of House No. 107/99, Jawahar Nagar, Sisamau, Kanpur Nagar, the details whereof are given in the judgment and order dated 115 2001 (Annexure 1 to the writ petition) passed by the Prescribed Authority, which is referred to hereinafter. The said accommodation has, hereinafter, been referred to as �the disputed accommodation�.

From a perusal of the averments made in the writ petition and the annexures thereto, it appears that the respondent Nos. 2 and 3 filed a release application under Section 21 (1) (a) of the U.P. Act No. 13 of 1972 (in short �the Act�) against the petitioner for release of the disputed accommodation.

It further appears that by the judgment and order dated 11 5.2001 passed by the learned Judge, Small Cause Court/Prescribed Authority, Kanpur Nagar, the said release application was rejected. Copy of the said judgment and order dated 1152001 has been filed as Annexure 1 to the writ petition.

Thereupon, the respondent Nos. 2 and 3 filed an appeal under Section 22 of the Act, which was registered as Rent Appeal No. 51 of 2001.

During the pendency of the said Rent Appeal No. 51 of 2001, an application dated 16102003 (Paper No. 13 Ga) was filed on behalf of the petitioner, interalia, praying for appointment of an Advocate Commissioner to make spot inspection and submit his report. Copy of the said application dated 1610 2003 (Paper No. 13 Ga) has been filed as Annexure 2 to the writ petition.

It further appears that objections were filed on behalf of the respondent Nos. 2 and 3 against the said application dated 1610 2003 (Paper No. 13 Ga) filed on behalf of the petitioner. Copy of the said objections filed on behalf of the respondent Nos. 2 and 3 has been filed as Annexure 3 to the writ petition.

By the impugned order dated 5112003 (Annexure 5 to the writ petition), the said application dated 16102003 (Paper No. 13 Ga) filed on behalf of the petitioner was rejected by the Appellate Authority.

Thereafter, the petitioner has filed the present writ petition seeking the reliefs mentioned above.

I have heard Shri H.N. Singh, learned Counsel for the petitioner, and Shri Arun Kumar Singh, learned Counsel for the caveator respondent Nos. 2 and 3, and perused the record.

From the aforesaid narration of facts, it is evident that the impugned order dated 511 2003 (Annexure 5 to the writ petition) is an interlocutory order passed during the pendency of the said Rent Appeal No. 51 of 2001.

It will be open to the petitioner to challenge the said order dated 5112003, in case, the final decision in the said Rent Appeal No. 51 of 2001 goes against the petitioner, and the petitioner challenges such final decision before this Court.

Therefore, without going into the merits of the impugned order dated 5112003, I am of the opinion that no interference is called for with the said order at this stage.

In the circumstances, the writ petition is dismissed subject to the observations made above.