Learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that the petitioners have filed a suit for eviction. The said suit was decreed in the year 1968. The first appeal filed against the said order has been dismissed. The decree has been put for execution. The tenants vacated the premises in dispute. However, a second appeal was filed in which the decree of 1968 has been reversed. Subsequently, in the year 1996, the building, being in a dilapidated condition, had fallen down. The tenants have to give the notice for reconstruction but no such notice has been given and thereafter the petitioners constructed the building. Now the old tenants moved an application for the restoration of the possession over the shop which has been allowed by the trial court and the revision filed by the petitioners has been dismissed.
Learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that the old cause ceases to exist when the building has been demolished. Under the provisions of the Act, the respondents have no right to claim repossession.
The matter requires consideration.
Issue notice to respondent no. 1, returnable at an early date. The petitioners may take steps to serve the respondent no. 1 within two weeks.
List in week commencing 2.5.2011.
Till the next date of listing, the operation of the order of the trial court dated 27.5.2008 in suit no. 128 of 2006 (Smt. Geeta Devi and others Vs. Vidyaram Sharma) and the order of the revisional authority dated 14.12.2010 in Civil Revision No. 95 of 2008 shall remain stayed.
Order Date :- 16.3.2011 OP