Disposed

Dr. Ajay Singh v. State of Up and 2 Others

Allahabad HC8 Jul 2024WRIA/8394/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court disposed of a writ petition challenging non-implementation of a 2018 order for vacating a house. The petitioner alleged the landlord failed to vacate despite a year deadline. Respondent agreed to vacate by 10.07.2024 in a counter affidavit. The court granted this relief.

What did the court decide?

Direction to Respondent No. 3 to vacate the premises and hand over peaceful possession to the petitioner on 10.07.2024.

Dr. Ajay Singh vs State of Up and 2 Others — Landlord and Tenant | Allahabad HC (2024)

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2024:AHC:110531

¶2

Court No. - 6

¶3

Case :- WRIT - A No. - 8394 of 2024

¶4

Petitioner :- Dr. Ajay Singh Respondent :- State Of Up And 2 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Kamlesh Kumar Tiwari Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.

¶5

Hon'ble Saral Srivastava,J.

¶6

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri Meva Lal Gupta, learned Standing Counsel for the State.

¶7

This Court on 27.05.2024 passed the following order:-

¶8

"1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri I.P. Srivastava, learned Additional Chief Standing Counsel for the State.

¶9

2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that petitioner has filed SCC Cuit No. 2 of 2017 against the respondent Nos. 1 & 3, which was allowed vide order dated 25.05.2018 and direction was issued to pay electricity bill, but prayer for vacation of property in question was rejected with observation that defendant No.1-respondent No. 3 is present before the Court and agreed on the point that house in question shall be vacated within a year and possession shall also be given to the plaintiff-petitioner. Court has also made observation that both the parties shall proceed to execute the compromise to vacate the house in question not compelling the landlord to approach the Court again. He next submitted that this order has been passed on 25.05.2018, and thereafter, defendant No. 1-respondent No. 3 is continuously sending notices that they are trying their level best to rent out any of the house and vacate the house in question. He next submitted that more than six years have passed from the date of order, but till date position is the same and house has not been vacated.

¶10

3. Under such facts of the case, learned Additional Chief Standing Counsel prays for and is granted four weeks' time to file counter affidavit with specific averment that by which time, respondent No. 3 shall vacate the house in question. Rejoinder, if any, may be filed within two weeks thereafter.

¶11

4. List this case on 08.07.2024 amongst top 10 cases."

¶12

Sri Meva Lal Gupta, learned Standing Counsel has filed short counter affidavit today, which is taken on record, in which respondent no.3 in paragraph nos.5 & 6 has averred that he shall vacate the suit premises on 10.07.2024. Paragraph nos.5 & 6 of the short counter affidavit are reproduced herein below:-

¶13

"5. That in order to the aforesaid the process of vacating the building is going on by the respondent no.3 District Supply Officer and the building shall completely be vacated till 10.07.2024 and the owner of the building has also be made aware regarding the aforesaid vide letter no.603 dated 01.07.2024.

¶14

6. That the deponent humbly submits that in view of the aforesaid facts and circumstances the building in question shall completely be vacated till 10.07.2024."

¶15

In view of the averments made in paragraph nos.5 & 6 of the short counter affidavit, the writ petition is disposed off with a direction to respondent no.3 to vacate the premises in question on 10.07.2024 and handover the peaceful possession of the premises in question to the petitioner.

¶16

Order Date :- 8.7.2024 Sattyarth

¶17

Digitally signed by :- SATTYARTH ANAND High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Dr. Ajay Singh v. State of Up and 2 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Dr. Ajay Singh v. State of Up 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

Pankaj Kumar Singh and 6 Others vs State of Up and 2 Others

Shri Nirmal Panchayati Akhara Pili Kothi vs Munnu Lal Vaishya and 3 Others

Ram Harakh vs State of Up and 4 Others

M/S Aero Club through General Manager Rajeev Khurana and 4 Others vs Sunil Kumar Baluni

Sajid vs State of Up and 3 Others

Surendra Pal Singh vs State of U.P. and Another