Rakesh Tiwari, J. - (1.) THIS Court vide order dated 22.9.2006 has enhanced the rent to Rs. 2,500/ -. A review application was thereafter filed by the respondent -tenant which has also been rejected by order of this Court dated 16.1.2006. Aggrieved, the respondent -tenant moved to the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Special Leave to Appeal (Civil) No. CC1458/2007 which has been dismissed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court by order dated 19.2.2007. The learned Counsel for the petitioner -landlord states that the respondent -tenant is not complying with the order of this Court dated 22.9.2006.
(2.) THE case is listed for final hearing. The learned Counsel for the respondent -tenant is not present. It appears that after loosing from the Hon'ble Supreme Court also the respondent -tenant wants to delay the hearing of the case by not complying with the aforesaid order of this Court.
(3.) HEARD learned Counsel for the petitioner landlord, none has appeared on behalf of the respondent to press the counter affidavit. Though the contention of the learned Counsel for the petitioner is not rebutted by anyone on behalf of the respondent -tenant and they are liable to be presumed as correct, yet the averments made in the counter affidavit are being noted.;