Pankaj Mithal, J. - (1.) Heard Sri P.K. Jain, Senior Counsel, assisted by Sri N.K. Chaturvedi, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and Sri Satish Kumar Rai, Senior Panel Counsel Government of India appearing for respondents No. 1 to 4. Respondents No.5 to 8 are formal party.
(2.) The suit of the petitioner for eviction of the respondents No.1 to 4 on the ground of arrears of rent and material alteration was allowed by the Small Causes Court holding the notice determining the tenancy to be a valid notice with the further findings that the respondents No. 1 to 4 had defaulted in payment of rent for over 4 months and that they have materially altered the structure so as to disfigure it and diminishing its value and utility.
(3.) The revisional court by the impugned judgement and order dated 13.05.2010 allowed the revision of the respondents No. 1 to 4 only for the reason that the notice determining the tenancy is invalid without discussing and touching the findings on arrears of rent and material alteration.;