The revisionists are tenant in the shop. The suit was filed by the respondents for the ejectment and arrears of rent. The said suit has been decreed on 7.4.2011 mainly on the ground that the provision of Act No. 13 of 1972 is not applicable inasmuch as the shop which was given on rent was newly constructed shop. Reliance has been placed on the agreement dated 21.7.2002 which has been filed by the revisionist as Anneure-1 to the supplementary affidavit.
Learned counsel for the revisionists submitted that admittedly as per the pleading in the plaint, the plaintiffs had purchased the plot by registered sale deed dated 26.6.2002. The map was sanctioned on 10.7.2002 therefore it was not possible to construct a shop and let out on 15.7.2002. Therefore, the pleading of the plaintiffs that it was a newly constructed shop is wholly incorrect. He submitted that the revisionists have disputed the signatures over the agreement dated 21.7.2002. Despite the dispute being raised, the signatures have not been got verified from the Handwriting Expert. On the facts and circumstances, the impugned order is bad in law.
The matter requires consideration.
Issue notice to the respondents returnable at an early date. The revisionists may take steps to serve the respondents by registered post within 10 days.
List in the week commencing 18.7.2011.
Till the next date of listing, the operation of the order dated 7.4.2011 passed in J.S.C.C. Suit no. 6 of 2005 (Mohd. Ilyas and another Vs. Muzammil Hussain (since deceased) and others shall remain stayed.
Order Date :- 16.5.2011 OP