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


Shiv Narain v. The Tehsildar Sadar, District Kanpur Nagar And Others - WRIT - C No. 17981 of 2006 [2006] RD-AH 7642 (12 April 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).


Court No.10.

Civil Misc.  Writ Petition No.17981 of 2006.

Shiv Narain ............................Petitioner.


The Tehsildar, Sadar

District-Kanpur Nagar

and others. .............................Respondents.


Hon'ble A.K.Yog, J.

Hon'ble V.C.Misra, J.

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri Govind Saran, Advocate on behalf of contesting respondents and perused the pleadings contained in Writ Petition as well as the Annexures.

It has come on  record that Misc. Appeal No.425 of 2005, Shiv Narain Versus Union of India and another under Section 9 of Public Premises (Eviction of Unauthorised Occupants) Act, 1971/Annexure 10 to the  Writ Petition along with Interim Stay Application /Annexure 12 to the Writ Petition against order dated 24.10.2005 passed by Estate Officer, N.E. Railway, Lucknow under Section 7(2) of the aforesaid Act, ordering to pay sum of Rs.3, 16, 970/- for the period 1.3.1988 to 31.3.2005 is pending before the Court of District Judge, Kanpur Nagar.

Petitioner is aggrieved due to issuance of recovery citation dated February 1, 2006 /Annexure 11 to the Writ Petition for Rs.3,69,495/-. According to the petitioner, as stated at the Bar,  he will be liable to pay approximately Rs.1,50,000/- (rupees 1.5 lacs) according to his calculations.  

In view of the above we direct the petitioner to deposit a sum of Rs.1,50,000/- (rupees 1.5 lacs) with the Estate Officer, North Eastern Railway, Lucknow /Respondent No.3 within one month from today and file an application with an affidavit along with proof before the District Judge, Kanpur Nagar in the aforesaid Appeal No.425 of 2005 within the aforesaid period itself alongwith certified copy of this order. District Judge shall take into account the amount deposited under this order and any other amount deposited by the petitioner towards the liability in question.  The District judge shall also decide the appeal as expeditiously as possible preferably within six months.  

It is further directed that in case aforesaid amount as stipulated above is deposited the respondents shall not enforce recovery on the basis of the impugned recovery certificate dated 1.2.2006/Annexure 11 to the  Writ Petition and the same shall be subject to any order which may be passed in appeal.  

In case of petitioner fails to deposit the aforesaid amount within the time stipulated above this order shall stand automatically discharge without further reference to the Court.

Writ petition is finally disposed of subject to above directions.

No order as to costs.




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.