Disposed

Vishwanath Prashad Jaiswal (Since Deceased) and 2 Others v. Court of Prescribed Authority (Judge S.C.C., Gorakhpur) and 2 Others

Allahabad HC19 Apr 2018A227/2585/2018

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This writ petition under Article 227 sought a direction to the Prescribed Authority, Gorakhpur to decide a pending P.A. Case filed in 2010 expeditiously. The High Court directed the Authority to decide the Release Application within two months without adjournments based on the relevant Rules.

What did the court decide?

Directed the Prescribed Authority to decide the Release Application within two months without unnecessary adjournments.

Vishwanath Prashad Jaiswal (Since Deceased) and 2… — Landlord and Tenant | Allahabad HC (2018)

¶1

Court No. - 26

¶2

Case :- MATTERS UNDER ARTICLE 227 No. - 2585 of 2018 Petitioner :- Vishwanath Prashad Jaiswal (Since Deceased) And 2 Others Respondent :- Court Of Prescribed Authority (Judge S.C.C., Gorakhpur) And 2 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Sunil Kumar Gupta

¶3

Hon'ble Mrs. Sangeeta Chandra,J.

¶4

This petition has been filed under Article 227 of the Constitution praying for a direction to the Prescribed Authority, Gorakhpur to decide the P.A. Case No. 45 of 2010 (Vishwanath Prasad Jaiswal Vs. Faridul Haque & others) as expeditiously as possible within the stipulated time period as provided by this Court

¶5

It has been submitted that the petitioner no. 1 - Vishwanath Prasad Jaiswal (since deceased) had filed a P.A. Case No. 45 of 2010 on the ground of bonafide need. The tenant / respondent appeared and filed objections on 30.7.2013 and since then he failed to appear and the Court has proceeded ex-parte . Thereafter, evidence was led and statement was recorded of P.W. 1. The father of the petitioner nos. 1/1 & 1/2, Ashwani Kumar died on 14.12.2015 and then the petitioner no. 1 - Vishwanath Prasad Jaiswal also died on 23.6.2017.

¶6

A Substitution Application was filed. Objections to the said Substitution Application were filed by the respondent no. 1 and the Substitution Application has only been decided on 8.2.2018.

¶7

It is evident from a perusal of the order sheet, a copy of which has been filed as Annexure that the case is being repeated adjourned on one ground or the other, either the Presiding Officer has been on leave or the tenant / respondent has sought adjournment. The case is pending since 2010 and for the past eight years, the landlords are suffering.

¶8

Accordingly, this petition is disposed of with a direction to the learned Court below to consider the Release Application on its merit in view of the

¶9

fact that in the Rules itself under Rule 15(3) of the U.P. Urban Buildings (Regulation of Letting, Rent and Eviction) Rules, 1972, it has been provided that the Release Application shall be considered and decided within two months from the date of its filing.

¶10

The learned Court below shall decide the pending Release Application within a period of two months from the date a certified copy of this order is produced before it, without giving unnecessary adjournment to either of the parties.

¶11

Order Date :- 19.4.2018 Arif

Vishwanath Prashad Jaiswal (Since Deceased) and 2 Others v. Court of Prescribed Authority (Judge S.C.C., Gorakhpur) and 2 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Vishwanath Prashad Jaiswal (Since Deceased) and 2 Others v. Court of Prescribed Authority (Judge S.C.C., Gorakhpur) and 2 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Manmohan Verma Vs Mahesh Verma and Another

babu lal yadav Vs dilip kumar sahu

Saiyad Mohammad Wahid Ali and Another Vs Prescribed Authority/Additional Chief Metropolitan MAGISTRATE-5TH and Another

Khwaja Soab Ullah Vs Prescribed Authority/Civil Judge (Senior Division), Azamgarh and 3 Others

Syed Abul Hasnat and Another Vs Rais

Syed Abul Hansal and Another Vs Mahphooz