Smt. Sushila Devi vs Pankaj Kumar

J.V. Gupta, J.—This petition is directed against the order of the trial Court dated December 17, 1983.

The Respondent-landlord filed the application for ejectment of his tenant which was fixed on 17th December, 1983, for the evidence of the landlord-Petitioner. However, the case was dismissed in default as no one appeared when the ease was called. On that very day the tenant Sushila Devi filed an application that her counsel was present since 10 AM in the Court and was awaiting for his belog(sic) called. Under these circumstances, she prayed, that their predence may kindly be noted. This application was disposed of by the Rent Controller with the following order:

This unstamped application has been given by Shri O. P. Gupta, Advocate, Rohtak at 4.15 P.M. today. The case has already been dismissed in default. It be consigned with that file. The allegations in the application are incorrect.

It is this order which has been challenged by way of petition in this Court.

The petition is wholly misconceived. The application being unstamped could not be entertained and the Rent Controller rightly passed the impugned order.

The Petitioner has relied upon Bhim Sain v. Laxmi Narain (1982) 84 P.L.R. 50, to contend that the counter claim made by the tenant In the written statement was to be gone into by the Rent Controller even if the landlord was not interested in pursuing the ejectment application. That does not avail the Petitioner in the absence of proper application. However, the Petitioner may file proper application, if so advised, and if filed, the same may be disposed of in accordance with law.

Consequently, the petition fails and is dismissed with no order as to costs.