Research › Search › Judgment

Allahabad High Court · body

2014 DIGILAW 342 (ALL)

Nawab Jamshed Ali Khan v. Sushil Kumar

2014-01-29

SUDHIR AGARWAL

body2014
JUDGMENT Sudhir Agarwal,J.: - Order on Civil Misc. Recall Application No.112444 of 2013 This is an application seeking recall of order dated 21.2.2013 whereby writ petition was disposed of at the admission stage without issuing notice to the respondent. Operative part of the order reads as under: "There appears to be force in the submission, inasmuch as while considering the application under Section 29-A of the Act on merits, the issue as to whether there exists relationship of landlord and tenant between the parties and whether the application of the petitioner is maintainable, shall also be considered, hence, there appears to be no justification to take up the said issue as a preliminary issue. Further, it appears that the application has simply been moved by the respondent no. 2 in order to delay the disposal of the proceedings. Considering the facts and circumstances, writ petition stands disposed of with the direction to the Rent Control and Eviction Officer/City Magistrate, Muzaffarnagar to decide the proceedings of Case No. 1 of 2011 on merits in accordance with law after notice and opportunity of hearing to all concern within a period of three months from the date of production of a certified copy of this order before him. While deciding the application under Section 29 A of the Act on merits, the court shall simultaneously also consider the objection raised by the tenant-respondent vide application under Section 151 C.P.C." 2. Sri P.K.Jain, Senior Advocate, appearing for applicants-respondents contended that he has already moved an objection/application that there does not exist any relationship of landlord and tenant and that application should be decided first as preliminary issue. 3. In my view, the submission is not correct, inasmuch as, all these aspects can be considered by Rent Control and Eviction Officer while deciding the matter finally and there is no occasion to decide any particular issue as a preliminary issue. However, it is made clear that whatever objections/applications have been moved by respective parties, the authority concerned shall consider all such objections particularly those which raises jurisdictional issues and decide the same expeditiously as already directed. I, therefore, do not find any justification to recall order dated 21.2.2013. 4. With the aforesaid clarification, the application is rejected.