Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC-LKO:25595 Court No. - 6 Case :- WRIT - A No. - 1000123 of 2014 Petitioner :- Ram Kishore Vishwakarma Respondent :- Mohd. Saleem And Another Counsel for Petitioner :- Girish Chandra Sinha,Mayank Sinha Counsel for Respondent :- U.N.Misra,Pankaj Pandey Hon'ble Pankaj Bhatia,J. 1. No one appears on behalf of the respondents and an illness slip has sent. However, as the matter is very old, I am not inclined to adjourn the matter any further. 2. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner. 3. The facts that emerge from the proceedings are that a SCC Suit No.3 of 1996 was preferred by the petitioner against the tenant, which came to be decreed on 29.09.2008. Challenging the said order, a revision was preferred, which was numbered as SCC No.8 of 2008. By means of the said revisional order, the matter was remanded by the revisional court basically on the ground that the notice as served was denied by the tenant and there was no comparative analysis of the said signatures. 4. Learned counsel for the petitioner argues that JSCC Court had recorded the findings of fact with regard to service of the notice and the revisional court in exercise of power under revision could not have re-appreciated the facts and had to decide the matter on the limited grounds, which are available for exercise of power of revision. He further argues that even the rent which was directed to be paid by the revisional court is not being paid. 5. Considering the fact that no one has appeared despite service, the contention of learned counsel for the petitioner is that the revisional court could not have re-appreciated the evidence, merits acceptance. Considering the order of the JSCC recorded that there was a default committed by the tenant even after service of notice through registered post, the exercise of revisional power to offset the said findings of fact is wholly arbitrary, as such, the order dated 14.10.2014 is quashed. The order dated 29.09.2008 is affirmed. 6. The execution shall proceed in accordance with law and shall be done expeditiously preferably within a period of six months in view of the judgement of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Civil Appeal Nos.3640-3642 of 2025 (Periyammal (Dead) Through Lrs. and Ors. Vs. Rajamani and Anr. ETC.) dated 06.03.2025. 7. The writ petition stands disposed of in terms of above. Order Date :- 2.5.2025 Ashutosh Digitally signed by :- ASHUTOSH PANDEY High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench