- (1.) A. K. Yog, J. By means of present petition judgments and orders dated 21st January 1983 (Annexure-7 to the Writ Petition) and dated July 13, 1983 (Annexure-8) have been challenged.
(2.) PETITIONER prays that the said im pugned orders passed by Respondent Nos. 2 and 1 respectively be quashed by issuing a writ of certiorari. Heard Sri B. D. Mandhyan, Senior Advocate, assisted by Sri Om Prakash. No one appears on behalf of the respondents. I have perused the impugned or ders (Annexures 7 and 8), S. C. C. Suit No. 138 of 1980 was filed by one Mohammad Usuf and others against Abdul Samad (petitioner), in which Court of Judge Small Causes, Meerut passed an ex pane decree for arrears of rent and ejectment from House No. 471 situated in the city of Meerut, details of which have been men tioned in the plaint of the said suit (Annexure-1 ). Suit was decreed exparte vide judgment and order dated 6th January, 1981 (Annexure-4 ).
(3.) DEFENDANT filed an application for recalling of the said exparte judgment and decree. The said application was sup ported by an affidavit of the DEFENDANT dated 6th January 1981 (Annexure-5 ). The defendant alleged that summons were not served upon hint, but he came to know from plaintiff Mohammad Usuf and Riazuddin, who Ere occupants of adjoin ing Shop No. 500, informed defendant of the exparte decree on that very day. The defendant according to his affidavit made enquiries same day and filed an applica tion for recalling of the ex pane decree dated 16th January, 1999. Rent was also deposited by hint in Miscellaneous Case No. 4 of 1990. The said recalling applica tion (Annexure-6) was however, opposed by Mohammad Usuf (Respondent-3) and it is alleged that the explanation submitted in the said recall application was con cocted and that the tenant had notice of the proceedings before the Judge, Small Causes Court. It was further alleged that the defendant intentionally avoided to receive summons when the process-server wanted to contact and the application was not in accordance with law. The defendant (sic) pleaded that Defendant had knowledge and no case for recalling the order was made out.;