Over 2 lakh Indian cases. Search powered by Google!

Case Details


High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Case Law Search

Indian Supreme Court Cases / Judgements / Legislation


Smt. Usha Kiran v. State Of U.P. Thru' D.M. & Another - WRIT - C No. 58315 of 2005 [2006] RD-AH 7079 (31 March 2006)


This is an UNCERTIFIED copy for information/reference. For authentic copy please refer to certified copy only. In case of any mistake, please bring it to the notice of Joint Registrar(Copying).



Civil Misc. Writ Petition No. 58315 of 2005

Smt. Usha Kiran


State of U.P. & Anr.

Hon'ble Dr. B.S. Chauhan, J.

Hon'ble Shishir Kumar, J.

This case has a chequered history as there has been several rounds of litigation and ultimately the petitioner succeeded and various orders passed against her by the respondent authorities have been quashed. This Court vide order dated 02.04.2004 (Annex.12) while allowing Writ Petition No. 16456 of 1998, directed the authorities of the Kanpur Development Authority, Kanpur (hereinafter called the ''K.D.A.') to consider the case of the petitioner for regularisation of land and pass a speaking and reasoned order after hearing the present petitioner. In order to ensure compliance of the order, the application of the petitioner for regularisation of land within the zone of K.D.A. was considered by the respondent authority vide impugned order dated 16.07.2005 (Annex.14) and rejected her claim on several grounds. The said order is under challenge.

The matter has been heard several times and on 12.09.2005, this Court had asked the petitioner to clarify one of the grounds of rejection, i.e. the petitioner had executed a registered agreement to sell  in favour of Swami Pratap Singh on 18.04.1996 and, therefore, after disposing of the property and putting him in possession, under what circumstances, she was claiming regularisation. The petitioner filed reply stating that if any such agreement is in existence, it is a fabricated document and might have been forged/fabricated by the K.D.A. itself in order to allot the said land in favour of some other person.

Shri Ramesh Upadhyay, learned counsel appearing for the K.D.A. has produced before us the photocopy of the agreement to sell, a registered document. We have compared the signatures of the petitioner made in Vakalatnama and affidavit of this petition and the signatures put by her on the agreement to sell. They resemble very much but that cannot be a final assessment.

However, in the facts and circumstances of the case, if the said agreement to sell is a forged and fabricated document, it is open to the petitioner to approach the appropriate forum as this Court lacks expertise to adjudicate upon such issues and also it requires taking evidence for adjudication of her claim. Petition is accordingly dismissed. However, if so advised, petitioner may approach the appropriate forum for the relief sought in this petition.



Reproduced in accordance with s52(q) of the Copyright Act 1957 (India) from judis.nic.in, indiacode.nic.in and other Indian High Court Websites


dwi Attorney | dui attorney | dwi | dui | austin attorney | san diego attorney | houston attorney | california attorney | washington attorney | minnesota attorney | dallas attorney | alaska attorney | los angeles attorney | dwi | dui | colorado attorney | new york attorney | new jersey attorney | san francisco attorney | seattle attorney | florida attorney | attorney | london lawyer | lawyer michigan | law firm |

Double Click on any word for its dictionary meaning or to get reference material on it.