AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
O. P. Garg, J.—Heard Sri R.N. Tripathi, learned Counsel for the petitioner as well as Sri Ajit Kumar assisted by Sri Yasharth appearing on behalf of contesting respondents landlord. J.S.C.C. Suit for eviction of the petitioner was instituted. It was decreed on 1972000. Against the said order the petitioner preferred a revision application No. 786 of 2000 which too has been dismissed by the Rcvisional Court on 2111 2000. Learned Counsel for the petitioner pointed out that the petitioner had not committed default in payment of the arrears of rent and the question of denial of title was not properly dealt with.
After having heard learned Counsel for the parties I find that the concurrent findings of fact are not required to be disturbed by invoking extraordinary jurisdiction under Article 226 of Constitution of India. Sri R.N. Tripathi further admits that the petitioner has already been dispossessed from the disputed accommodation pursuant to the decree passed in S.C.C. Suit No. 68 of 1999. Therefore, I am not inclined to interfere in the matter.
The petition is dismissed.