Sri Hem Pratap Singh has put in appearance on behalf of plaintiffs-respondents no. 1 to 3. His Vakalatnama is taken on record.
This revision under Section 25 of the Provincial Small Causes Court is directed against the judgment and order of eviction dated 18.9.2010.
The contention of learned counsel for the defendant-revisionist is that the tenancy was not a fixed term tenancy and the court below has erred in relying on an unregistered lease deed in holding it to be a fixed term tenancy and that no notice terminating the tenancy under Section 106 of the Transfer of Property Act is required.
Perusal of the impugned judgment and order indicates that the execution of the lease deed is admitted to the parties and therefore, prima facie for collateral purposes which may include determination of the period of lease, the same can be relied upon irrespective of registration.
Counsel for the defendant-revisionist however, wants to bring on record the copy of the plaint, written statement and the notice dated 11.9.2008 for making the final submissions. He may do so within a week by filing a supplementary affidavit .
List for admission/final disposal as agreed on 8.11.2010.
Counsel for the plaintiff-respondent submits that till 10th of November 2010 the decree is not to be executed.
In view of the above, there is no need for any interim order at this stage. It shall be considered on the next date fixed.
Order Date :- 21.10.2010 piyush