AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
Manoj Kumar Tiwari, J
WPMS No. 2324 of 2011 was filed by the tenants against the judgment and order dated 29.09.2011 passed by learned Additional District
Judge/VIth F.T.C., Dehradun in SCC Revision No. 15 of 2006. By the said judgment, revision, filed by the landlords against the judgment rendered in
S.C.C. Suit No. 82 of 1975, was partly allowed, finding given by learned trial court on issue nos. 6 and 9 was set aside and the case was remanded
back to learned Judge, Small Causes Court to record findings afresh on issue nos. 6 and 9.
WPMS No. 2616 of 2012 has also been filed by the same tenants challenging interlocutory order dated 03.09.2012 passed by learned 2nd Additional
Civil Judge (S.D.)/Judge SCC in SCC Suit No. 82 of 1975. By the said order, learned trial court had allowed landlord’s application for appointment
of Amin for the purpose of measuring the distance of the building in question from Nagar Palika, Vikas Nagar.
The application which was allowed by learned Judge, Small Causes Court vide order dated 3.09.2012 is on record as annexure No. 6 to the writ
petition. In the opening sentence of the said application, there is a reference to the order of remand passed by Revisional Court.
Today, Ms. Akleema Praveen, Advocate holding brief of Mr. Piyush Garg, learned counsel appearing for the petitioners has made a statement that
SCC Suit No. 82 of 1975 itself has been finally decided on merits.
Mr. Neeraj Garg, learned counsel appearing for the respondents does not dispute this statement made by learned counsel for the petitioner.
Since, Suit No. 82 of 1975 itself has been finally decided, therefore, both the writ petitions have become infructuous.
Accordingly, the writ petitions are dismissed as infructuous. Interim order(s), if any, stands vacated.