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. Budhwanti Devi v. Sri P.K. Misra - WRIT - A No. 3598 of 1986 [2006] RD-AH 9742 (17 May 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.51)

Civil Misc. Writ Petition No.3598 of 1986

Smt. Budhwanti Devi  Vs.  Sri Pradeep Kumar Misra and another


In this case on 3.5.2006 the following order was passed on the order sheet:-

"Learned counsel for both the parties states that both the parties have compromised the matter.  The Court places on record great appreciation for learned counsel for both the parties who persuaded their clients to enter into compromise.  Under the compromise petitioner landlord is to pay Rs.55,000/- (Fifty five thousand only) to respondent No.1 - Pradeep Kumar Misra.  Today a cheque of Rs.55,000/- drawn in favour of respondent No.1 has been handed over by learned counsel for the petitioner to learned counsel for the respondent No.1.

List for final orders on 17.5.2006 on which date respondent No.1 must intimate as to whether the cheque has been encashed or not.  If the cheque is encashed then formal order of disposal of the writ petition in terms of compromise will be passed on the next date."

Learned counsel for landlord has shown extract of bank account showing transfer of money from landlord's account to the account of respondent no.1 to the tune of Rs.55,000/-.  Cheque in respect of the said amount was handed over on 3.5.2006 in court.  Learned counsel for respondent no.1 states that his client is not responding.  It appears that after getting the money respondent no.1 is no more interested in the matter.

Accordingly, writ petition is disposed of.

Order dated 14.2.1986 passed by Prescribed authority/Munsif (City), Jaunpur in  P.A. case No.23 of 1986 - Badhuwanti Devi Vs. Shivnarain shall not be given effect to and in pursuance of the said order possession shall not be delivered to respondent.  The amount of Rs.55,000/- which has been received by respondent no.1 is in lieu of his giving up his right under the said order.  It is made clear that I have not decided anything on merit in respect of right of respondent no.1 to take back possession of the property in dispute.

However, in case respondent no.1 has not been able to get encashed the amount of Rs.55,000/- regarding which cheque was handed over to him on 3.5.2006 then application for recall of this order may be filed within a month.




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.