AFR HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD Suresh Shah Sisodiya …..Revisionist(s)

Versus Jai Prakash Yadav …..Opposite Party(s)

Counsel for Revisionist(s) : Devendra Dahma Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : Shishir Kumar Tiwari Court No. - 35 HON'BLE DR. YOGENDRA KUMAR SRIVASTAVA, J.

Heard Sri Devendra Dahma, learned counsel for the revisionist and Sri Shishir Kumar Tiwari, learned counsel for the opposite party.

2. The present S.C.C. Revision under Section 25 of the Provincial Small Cause Courts Act, 1887 has been preferred by the revisionist– plaintiff assailing the judgment and decree dated 30.10.2025 passed by the Judge, Small Cause Court/Additional District Judge, Court No.1, Etah in S.C.C. Suit No.11 of 2010, whereby the suit instituted for ejectment, arrears of rent, possession and damages has been dismissed.

3. Briefly stated, the case of the revisionist–plaintiff is that he became owner/landlord of the disputed tenanted premises on 07.11.2008 by virtue of a registered lease deed executed by the managers of the temple property, namely Shri Raj Rajeshwar Maharaj Mahadev Ji Maharaj Virajman Mandir. It is asserted that the opposite party was already occupying the premises as a tenant a