Ziauddin Beg @ Shafiq Miyan vs Civil Judge (S.D) Kheri And ...
2015 Latest Caselaw 2644 ALL

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD, LUCKNOW BENCH
 
 

?Court No. - 24
 

 
Case :- RENT CONTROL No. - 79 of 2015
 

 
Petitioner :- Ziauddin Beg @ Shafiq Miyan
 
Respondent :- Civil Judge (S.D) Kheri And Another
 
Counsel for Petitioner :- Yogendra Singh
 
Counsel for Respondent :- Shashank Singh
 

 
Hon'ble Dr. Devendra Kumar Arora,J.

Heard.

Petitioner has filed the instant writ petition for quashing the order dated 31.7.2015 passed by the Civil Judge (SD) Kheri whereby the application no. 67Kha dated 21.7.2015 alleged to have been filed pursuant to the order  dated 18.2.2015 passed by the Addl. District Judge, Lakhimpur, has been rejected.

It appears that the opposite party no. 2/Yogendra Kumar Gupta has filed a suit under Section 21(1) of the Uttar Pradesh Urban Buildings (Regulation) of Letting Rent and Eviction Act, 1972 which was registered as Case No. 7/2014. The said case is being contested by the petitioner, who also filed a written statement. In the said case, petitioner made an application under Section 34(1)(b) of the Act for cross examination of opposite party no.2 and his witnesses, which was rejected by the Trial Court vide order dated 4.12.2014.

Being dis-satisfied with the aforesaid order dated 4.12.2014, the petitioner preferred a Civil Revision No. 87/2014, which was allowed vide order dated 18.2.2015 and a direction was given to the court below to provide opportunity of hearing to the parties and decide the matter in accordance with law.

It appears that consequent to the aforesaid order dated 18.2.2015, the petitioner made an application after about 5 months before the Civil Judge (SD) Lakhimpur-Kheri, praying therein to give opportunity to file additional written statement and affidavit in support of additional written statement, which was rejected vide impugned order dated 31.7.2015. Again, the petitioner preferred a Civil Revision No. 151 of 2015, which was rejected by the Additional District Judge holding that against the order passed under Section 21 of the U.P.Act No. 13 of 1972, no Civil Revision is maintainable.

Having heard learned Counsel for the parties, I am of the view that the instant writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India is not maintainable in view of the recent pronouncement of the Apex Court in Radhey Shyam and another vs. Chhabi Nath and others; (2015)5 SCC 423  wherein it has been observed that judicial orders of the civil court not amenable to writ jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution.

For the reasons aforesaid the writ petition is dismissed. However, it will be open to the petitioner to approach the appropriate forum, if so advised.

Order Date :- 24.9.2015

MH/-