- (1.) RAKESH Tiwari-Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record.
(2.) THE petitioner has come up in this writ petition challenging the order dated 5.8.2002 passed by the Additional District Judge, Court No. 1, Rampur in S.C.C. Revision No. 96 of 1997, Munna Lal v. Surendra Kumar. THE order is as under : ...[VERNACULAR TEXT OMMITED]... The facts of the case, in brief, are that the petitioner had given his newly constructed shop on rent for four years to respondent No. 1 @ Rs. 250 per month in 1989. The tenancy was got extended by the respondent-tenant on one pretext or the other. When the respondent did not vacate the shop in dispute despite granting sufficient time for the same, the petitioner served him a notice dated 31.7.1995 through his counsel asking him to hand over the vacant possession of the shop in dispute to the landlord in two months. The respondent-tenant instead of vacating the shop in dispute, taking undue advantage of the leniency of the petitioner-landlord in extending the period of tenancy of the respondent-tenant filed Original Suit No. 109 of 1995 before the Civil Judge (Senior Division), Rampur for grant of permanent prohibitory injunction.
(3.) HOWEVER, the aforesaid suit No. 109 of 1995 filed by the respondent-tenant was dismissed vide judgment and decree dated 6.8.1996. Aggrieved, the respondent-tenant preferred Civil Appeal No. 83 of 1996, Munna Lal v. Surendra Kumar, before the District Judge, Rampur. However, the respondent-tenant withdrew the appeal by filing application dated 3.5.2000.;