1
Court No. 24
Writ Petition No. 1690 (MS) of 2005
Smt. Vishnu Devi and another ... Petitioners
Versus
Additional District Judge and others ... Opposite parties
----------
Hon'ble Rajiv Sharma, J.
Heard learned Counsel for the parties.
Learned Counsel for the petitioners submits that the
petitioners are tenants of the premises belonging to the opposite
party No.3 and they are regularly paying the rent. The opposite
party No.3 has filed a Suit for arrears of rent, damages and
ejectment in the Court of Judge Small Causes. Subsequently, the
opposite party No.2 has finally decreed the Suit without giving any
opportunity of hearing to the petitioners. Being aggrieved, the
petitioners filed a revision with a delay of two months, which has
been rejected by the impugned order dated 26.2.2005 on the
ground that they failed to give explanation of two months’ delay in
filing Revision.
Admittedly, the Revision has been filed beyond two months
alongwith an application under Section 5 of the Limitation Act
assailing the orders on the proceedings initiated under Section 25
of the Small Causes Court Act. In support of an application under
Section 5 of the Limitation Act, an affidavit has been filed. Cause
shown by the Revisionists/Petitioners is sufficient.
Accordingly, the writ petition is allowed on payment of costs
of Rs.3,000/- and the order dated 26.2.2005 passed by the
Revisional Authority/Additional District Judge, Lucknow is hereby
quashed. It is further provided that the Revisional Authority is
directed to admit the Revision and decide the same on merits,
within a maximum period of six months, from the date of
presentation of a certified copy of this order. Petitioners are
directed to deposit the costs in the Registry of this Court within a
2
period of one month from today and the Registrar is directed to
transmit the same to the Mediation and Conciliation Centre,
Lucnow within a period of one week from the date of its receipt.
Dt.14.7.2010
Lakshman/