Shashi Kant Gupta, J. - (1.) LEARNED Counsel for the petitioner is permitted to make necessary correction in the prayer part of the writ petition. Learned Counsel for the respondent has stated that he has already filed caveat in the matter but the same has not been reported.
(2.) WITH the consent of the learned Counsel for the parties the writ petition is disposed of finally. The present writ petition has been filed against the orders dated 11.2.2010 and 24.1.2011 passed by the Additional District Judge, Court No. 12, Allahabad in Misc. Case No. 24 of 2010 whereby the restoration application filed by the petitioner for setting aside the order dated 11.2.2010 has been rejected.
(3.) BRIEF facts of the case are as follows: A suit for arrears of rent and ejectment was filed by the respondent -landlord which was decreed by order dated 28.7.2005. Being aggrieved and dissatisfied with the said order, the petitioner filed a revision which was registered as Revision No. 565 of 2005. The said revision was dismissed in default by order dated 11.2.2010. Hence a restoration application was filed by the petitioner and the same has been rejected by the Court below by order dated 24.1.2011. Hence the present writ petition.;