S.U Khan, J.:— A release application filed under section 21 of U.P Act No. 13 of 1972 by landlord respondent against the tenant petitioner numbered as R.C No. 50 of 1994 was dismissed by prescribed Authority/Ist Additional JSCC Kanpur Nagar, through judgment and order dated 22.4.1997 Against the said judgment and order, respondent landlord filed appeal under section 22 of the Act being Rent Control Appeal No. 132 of 1997. IV Additional District Judge, Kanpur Nagar by judgment and order dated 6.3.1999, allowed the appeal and consequently release application of the landlord was allowed. In the appeal at the time of actual argument, learned Counsel for the tenant, who was respondent No. 4 in the appeal was not present, hence the appeal was allowed after hearing only the argument of the learned Counsel for the landlord/appellant. After more than 300 days tenant petitioner filed rehearing application on 5.1.2000 (Annexure 3 to the writ petition). The said application was numbered as Misc. Case No. 1/74/2000. The rehearing application has been rejected by Additional District Judge, Court No. 12, Kanpur Nagar through judgment and order dated 23.4.2002 as barred by time after holding that no ground for condonation of delay was made out.
2. This writ petition is directed against the aforesaid judgment and order.
3. After hearing learned Counsel for both the parties I am of the view that even though the Union of India tenant petitioner did not take as much care in conducting the case as a prudent litigant shall take still I feel that delay in filing application can not be said to be a result of utter negligence. As far as possible, efforts must be made for decision on merit.
4. I, therefore, allow the writ petition and set aside the order dated 23.4.2002 and allow the delay condonation application as well as rehearing application filed by the petitioner on payment of Rs. 10,000/- as cost. The cost must be paid within a month from today, failing which this order shall stand withdrawn and writ petition shall stand dismissed. It is further directed that the Appellate Court shall decide the appeal on merit after hearing the learned Counsel for both the parties within three months from the date of production of certified copy of this order.
5. Learned Counsel for the both the parties agreed that after allowing the delay condonation application, Court might pass the order on rehearing application also.
6. Learned Counsel for the petitioner undertakes that petitioner will not seek any adjournment. Both the parties are directed to appear before the Court concerned on 15.3.2004 along with a certified copy of this order. On the said date, next date must be fixed by the Appellate Court for hearing of the appeal.
7. A certified copy of this order may be given to the learned Counsel for the petitioner within two days on payment of usual charges.