AGRAWAL TRANSPORT CORPORATION Vs. GIRJABAI WD/O BALDEO PRASAD SHARMA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS revision petition has been filed under Section 23-E of the M.P. Accommodation Control Act, 1961, against the ex-parte order of eviction dated 7.3.1991, passed by the Rent Controlling Authority, Indore in eviction case No. A90(7) 56/90.

(2.) THE facts leading to this revision petition, in short, are that the petitioner was the tenant of the respondent in a shop comprising of two rooms in the building situated at 10(old) and 12(new) Nasia Road, Indore. The tenancy was for non-residential purpose. The respondents filed an application on 3.12.1990, before the Rent Controlling Authority, Indore against the petitioner under Section 23A(b) of the Accommodation Control Act, 1961, as a widow. On the same date an order for issuance of notice of the eviction application was passed by the Rent Controlling Authority directing the tenant to appear before the Court on 27.12.1990. On 27.12.1990, the Court found that the bailiff had given of non-service of notice on the ground that premises of the petitioner was locked. Thereafter the case was ordered to be put up on 28.12.1990. The Court on 28.12.1990, directed the notice to be served by affixation and finally on 11.1.1991, the Court found that although the notice has been served by affixation, still none is present. Therefore, an order for proceeding ex-prate against the tenant was made and the case was fixed for 22.1.1991, and thereupon and ex-prate decree of eviction was passed which has been challenged in this revision petition.

(3.) ON the other hand the learned counsel for the non-application Shri Sethi argues that as no application under Order 9, Rule 13, Civil Procedure Code had been filed, the present revision petition is not tenable. On merits Shri Sethi argues that the lower Court has not erred in any way in acting on the report of the bailiff. In reply Shri Waghmare states that an application under order 9, Rule 13, Civil Procedure Code was not necessary be cause the order impugned is a nullity because the service was not effected in accordance with law.