( 1 ) ON 9. 10. 2000 a last opportunity was granted to the Respondent to file a Reply within two weeks. Despite the passage of two months no Reply was filed. When the matter came up on 11. 1. 2001 a final opportunity to file the Reply within four weeks was granted subject to payment of Rs. 2000. 00 as costs. Neither has the Reply been filed nor have the costs been paid. Mr. Sharma, Learned Counsel for the Respondent states that he has just been engaged by the Respondent. He prays for an adjournment, which prayer is declined because of the Respondent s previous conduct. It is clear that the Respondent is adopting dilatory tactics. In these circumstances, I proceed to dispose off the matter on merits.

( 2 ) IT appears the Respondent No. 1 was inducted as a tenant into the premises by late Smt. Janki Devi at a monthly rent of Rs. 500. 00. On her demise, the present Petitioner, namely Kusum Lata Mishra assumed the role of the landlady. She is one of the daughters of late Janki devi, the other one being her sister Smt. Anar Devi. It is not in dispute that the Respondent No. 1 had attorned to Smt. Kusum Lata, since there are admissions in the written Statement that rents we