- (1.) C.M.No.1273-C of 2016 For the reasons stated in the application, which is duly supported by an affidavit, delay of 60 days in filing the appeal is condoned. C.M. stands disposed of. RSA No.429 of 2016 (O&M)
(2.) The appellant-plaintiff is aggrieved of the judgments and decrees of the Courts below, whereby, the suit for declaration challenging the ex parte judgment and decree dated 18.05.2006 passed by the Rent Controller in Rent Petition No.190 of 24.08.2002 in respect of House No.232, Ram Darbar, Phase-II, Chandigarh, has been dismissed by both the Courts below.
(3.) Ms. Swati Batra, learned counsel for the appellant-plaintiff submits that the appellant could not appear in the aforementioned rent petition and proceeded ex parte, therefore, ex parte judgment and decree dated 18.05.2006 was passed. After engaging the counsel, came to know about filing of the suit. The judgment had been obtained by fraud as rent petition was filed by attorney of Khazani Devi, who is not in existence. She further submits that there is illegality and perversity in the findings rendered by both the Courts below, much less, substantial question of law arises for adjudication of the present appeal.;