Prakash Krishna, J. - (1.) REJOINDER affidavit filed today may be taken on record. The present revision is directed against the order dated 19.3.2005 passed by the Additional District Judge in Misc. Case No. 58 of 2002 whereby it has refused to condone the delay in filing the revision against the judgment and decree dated 1.8.2001 passed in S.C.C. Suit No. 31 of 1990.
(2.) THE petitioner is a tenant against whom S.C.C. Suit No. 31 of 1990, Nisar Abbas v. Fathe -u -deen, was instituted on the ground of sub -letting and substantial damage to the building. The said case has a chequered history. The suit was ultimately decreed on 1.8.2001. Against the aforesaid decree a belated revision by 172 days was filed along with an application for condonation of delay in filing the revision. The said application has been dismissed by the impugned order. Heard learned Counsel for the parties.
(3.) THE condonation of delay was sought for on the ground that after the decree, a compromise took place between the parties whereby and whereunder rent was enhanced from Rs. 10/ - to Rs. 50/ - p.m. The allegation is that the petitioner was misled by the said compromise and he thought that there is no need to challenge the decree. However, when the decree -was put in execution the petitioner came to know that the landlord decree holder has refused, to honour the compromise arrived at between the parties. The said application for condonation of delay was contested by the landlord on the plea that no such compromise ever took place between the parties and as such no good ground for condonation of delay has been made out. The Court below has refused to condone the delay on the ground that no such compromise as relied upon by the petitioner was actually reduced into writing by the parties. He also took view even if such a compromise was arrived at, it has got no legal force in the absence of compliance of Order XXI, Rule 2, C.P.C.;