Promod Kumar & Anr vs Ram Palat

PROMOD KUMAR & ANR. ....APPELLANTS

VERSUS

RAM PALAT .... RESPONDENT

ORDER

1. Leave granted.

2. This is an appeal arising out of interim order dated 26th October,

2006 and order dated 8th February, 2007 both passed by a learned Judge

of the High Court of Judicature at Allahabad in Civil Misc. Writ Petition

No.30272 of 1998 and Modification Application No.260414 of 2006

respectively.

3. We have heard learned counsel for the parties and examined

impugned orders as well as other materials on record. From the impugned

orders, we find that the rate of rent payable by the tenants was Rs.25/- per

month, which has been increased by the High Court to Rs.1500/- per

month from October, 2006. Admittedly, the landlord (respondent herein)

was the writ petitioner before the High Court, in which he has challenged

the order of the Appellate Authority, by which the Appellate Authority had

set aside the order of eviction passed by the prescribed Authority. ::2::

4. In view of the above, we are of the view that the High Court was not

justified in increasing the rate of rent from Rs.25/- to Rs.1500/- in a petition

filed by the landlord challenging the order of the Appellate Authority setting

aside the eviction order passed by the prescribed Authority. Impugned

orders of the High Court are accordingly set aside and the Civil Appeal is

disposed of with no order as to costs. The High Court is requested to

dispose of the pending writ petition filed by the landlord within a period of

three months from the date of supply of a copy of this order to the High

Court, without granting any unnecessary adjournment to either of the

parties.

..................................J. (TARUN CHATTERJEE)

..................................J. (AFTAB ALAM) NEW DELHI, SEPTEMBER 03, 2008