CourtKutchehry.com
High Courts

Kishore Seth vs Prescribed Authority/Ist C.J.(Jr.D.), Kanpur Nagar and another

Allahabad High Court · Decided on 19 March 2009 · Citation: (2009) 03 AHC CK 0102

HON’BLE JUDGES
Prakash Krishna, J
ACTS & SECTIONS REFERRED
Uttar Pradesh Urban Buildings (Regulation of Letting, Rent and Eviction) Act, 1972 — Section 21(1)(a)
RESULT
Allowed
CASE NUMBER
Civil Miscellaneous Writ Petition No. 830 of 2008
Ask AI about this case

AI Structured Summary

Not yet generated for this judgment

No AI summary yet

Generate an eight-section analysis of this judgment — facts, issues, reasoning, ratio and a plain-language gist.

Judgment

7 paragraphs · 384 words

Prakash Krishna, J.—Heard, learned Counsel for the parties and perused'' the record. The present writ petition is directed against the interlocutory order dated 30th July, 2007 passed by the prescribed authority in Rent Case No. 14 of 2006 Satish Chandra Nigam v. Kishore Seth. The respondent herein filed an application for release of the accommodation in possession of the petitioner as tenant on the ground of bonafide need under section 21 (1) (a) of U.P. Act No. 13 of 1972. The said release matter is still pending. The petitioner who is tenant filed an application for spot inspection by a Commissioner to be appointed by the Court with regard to the accommodation in possession of the landlord. The said application having been dismissed by the impugned orders, the present writ petition has been filed.

2.

Having heard, learned Counsel for the parties, it seems necessary that the accommodation in occupation of the landlord may be got inspected by the prescribed authority through an Advocate Commissioner. Learned Counsel for the respondent also agrees to the suggestion of the Court that it will facilitate the early disposal of the release application.

3.

In this view of the matter, the order dated 30th July, 2007 is hereby set aside. The application filed by the petitioner for spot inspection of the accommodation in possession of the landlord through Vakil Commissioner is allowed. The prescribed authority shall appoint a Commissioner for spot inspection.

4.

It was submitted by the learned Counsel for the respondent that the respondent is an old and aged person he is about 87 years old. The prescribed authority is therefore, directed to dispose of the release matter expeditiously preferably within a period of 3 months from the date of production of the certified copy of this order. Parties shall cooperate with the prescribed authority in this regard.

5.

It was also submitted that the petitioner is not paying any rent since 2001. The petitioner shall pay the arrears of rent if not already paid to the landlord. In this regard the landlord may furnish the bank details before the prescribed authority and the prescribed authority shall pass appropriate order directing the tenant to deposit the rent in the said bank account.

6.

The writ petition succeeds and is allowed.

7.

No orders as to costs.