SHISHIR KUMAR,J. - (1.) HEARD Sri Vivek Saran, learned counsel for petitioner and Sri Yogesh Kumar Singh, Advocate holding brief of Sri Amit Malik, learned counsel appearing for respondents.
(2.) THIS writ petition has been filed for quashing the orders passed by revisional court dated 15.2.2008 (Annexure 9 to writ petition). Petitioner submits that he took a property having House no.112 (At present House No.99 ) having an area of 300 sq.metres at the rate of Rs.350/- per month from late Hari Singh in the year 1990 and rent was being paid by petitioner. In the year 1991, respondent no.1 claims that this property belongs to him and Sri Hari Singh has been restrained by the order of the District Magistrate, Meerut from selling out the property. Sri Hari Singh wanted to dispossess the petitioner, then a suit was filed as Suit No.138 of 1999 with a relief that petitioner may not be ejected from property in dispute without following the process of law. Trial court after considering the case has granted injunction order in favour of petitioner. It is also submitted that respondent No.1 has also appeared in the said suit filed his written statement and disclosed that property in dispute is a nazul property.
(3.) IN such circumstances, as there was a dispute between respondent No.1 and respondent Nos. 2 to 5 that who is the owner of property in dispute, in such circumstances, petitioner made an application under Section 30 Sub- Clause 2 of the Act No.13 of 1972 before competent authority to permit petitioner to deposit rent, as there was a dispute. The competent authority has allowed the application and directed petitioner to deposit the same in spite of the objection raised by respondents. Sri Hari Singh aggrieved by aforesaid order filed a revision but revisional court by the order impugned has allowed the revision and set aside the order passed by court below directing petitioner to pay rent to respondent Nos. 2 to 5. Hence the present writ petition.;