Disposed¶10

Ravindra Prakash Tiwari v. State of U.P. and 4 Others

Allahabad HC13 Jul 2022WRIC/19041/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Allahabad High Court writ petition (WRIT - C No. 19041 of 2022, decided 13.7.2022) by Manoj Kumar Gupta and Chandra Kumar Rai, JJ.; mandamus for execution of RERA recovery certificate dated 12.11.2021 (Complaint N.C.R.No.144/08/0237/2019, Ravindra Prakash Tiwari Vs. M/S Gardenia India Ltd.) for Rs.88,22,202.23; direction to District Magistrate, Gautam Budh Nagar, to execute within two months absent legal impediment, else speaking order within two weeks; notice on respondent No.4 dispensed with; petition disposed of.

What did the court decide?

Direction to respondent No.2, District Magistrate, Gautambudh Nagar, to execute the recovery certificate dated 12.11.2021 for Rs.88,22,202.23 preferably within two months, subject to no legal impediment; failing which, a speaking order within two weeks. ¶10

Ravindra Prakash Tiwari Vs State of U.P. and 4 Others — Allahabad HC (2022) — LawSathi Research

¶1

Court No. - 21

¶2

Case :- WRIT - C No. - 19041 of 2022

¶3

Petitioner :- Ravindra Prakash Tiwari Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 4 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Devesh Saxena Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Wasim Masood

¶4

Hon'ble Manoj Kumar Gupta,J. Hon'ble Chandra Kumar Rai,J.

¶5

Heard Sri Devesh Saxena, learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Standing Counsel representing the respondent Nos. 1, 2 and 3. Sri Wasim Masood, learned counsel has put in appearance on behalf of respondent No. 5.

¶6

The petitioner seeks issuance of writ of mandamus directing respondent No.2, District Magistrate, Gautam Budh Nagar to take appropriate action for executing the recovery certificate dated 12.11.2021 in Complaint No.N.C.R.No.144/08/0237/2019 (Ravindra Prakash Tiwari Vs. M/S Gardenia India Ltd. ). It has been submitted by the petitioner that the recovery certificate against respondent No.4 was issued as far back as on 12.11.2021, but the same has not been executed by the District Magistrate, Gautambudh Nagar, so far and the petitioner is being denied the fruits of the order of RERA Authorities, which was passed in his favour on 14.08.2020.

¶7

Learned Standing Counsel representing respondents 1, 2 and 3 submits that no fruitful purpose would be served by keeping the writ petition pending and the same can be disposed of directing respondent No.2 to proceed with the recovery certificate.

¶8

Having regard to the above submissions, we dispense with the service of notice upon respondent No.4 and dispose of the writ petition with direction to respondent No.2 i.e., District Magistrate, Gautambudh Nagar to make serious endeavor to execute recovery certificate dated 12.11.2021 for a sum of

¶9

Rs.88,22,202.23 as expeditiously as possible preferably within a period of two months provided there is no legal impediment. In case, respondent No.2 is unable to execute the recovery certificate on account of any legal impediment, he will pass a speaking order within two weeks from the date of receipt of a true attested copy of the instant order.

¶10

The petition stands disposed of.

¶11

Order Date :- 13.7.2022 PS

¶12

(Chandra Kumar Rai,J.) (Manoj Kumar Gupta,J.)

¶13

Digitally signed by PRITI SHARMA Date: 2022.07.14 16:35:45 IST Reason: Location: High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Ravindra Prakash Tiwari v. State of U.P. and 4 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Ravindra Prakash Tiwari v. State of U.P. and 4 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Harun Ali Vs State of U.P. and Another

Anant Kumar Agarwal Vs U.P. Jal Vidyut Nigam Limited and 3 Others

M/S Prem Engineering Vs U.P. Jal Vidyut Nigam Limited and 3 Others

Satish Kumar Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Ajnara Integrity Apartment Owner Association Vs State of U P and 3 Others

Prakashwati Vidya Mandir Junior High School Vs State of U.P. and 2 Others