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


Mrs. Annapurna Neogi And Others v. District Judge Kanpur Nagar And Another - WRIT - A No. 53557 of 2006 [2007] RD-AH 12123 (17 July 2007)


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. 7                                                        

         Civil Misc. Writ Petition No. 53557 of 2006

Mrs. Annapurna Neogi and others    vs. District Judge, Kanpur

                                                                 and another.


Hon'ble Rakesh Tiwari,J.

Heard counsel for the parties and perused the record.

Petitioners filed an application under Section 21(8) of U.P.Act No. 13 of 1972 before the Rent Control and Eviction Officer/Addl. City Magistrate V Kanpur Nagar for enhancement of rent of the  disputed portion of building no.39/15 situate at Meston Road, Kanpur Nagar under the tenancy of respondent no.2, Punjab National Bank.      

The respondent-bank contested the matter and filed objection thereto.

          After determining the valuation of the disputed accommodation, the Rent Control and Eviction Officer vide  order dated 14.7.2006 fixed the rent of the disputed accommodation amounting to Rs.18,300/- per month.

Aggrieved by the aforesaid order dated 14.7.2006 the respondent-bank filed Rent Appeal No. 13 of 2006 before the Appellate Court.

During the pendency of appeal, the appellate authority by its order dated 26.8.2006 modified the order dated 14.7.2006  decided by the Rent Control and Eviction Officer  directing the respondent-bank  to continue to deposit the enhanced rent amounting to Rs. 18,300/- per month in the Court of Rent Control and Eviction Officer but  restrained the petitioners-landlord from withdrawing the amount so deposited by the tenant. It is this order dated 14.7.2006 which is under challenge in this writ petition.

The only prayer of the counsel for the petitioners at this stage is that the tenant may be directed to pay enhanced amount of rent from October, 2001 to 2006 with interest determined by the Appellate Authority. The respondents do not have any objection to this innocuous prayer. The counsel for the respondents, however, submits that the enhanced rent may be directed to be determined and computed by the Court below within some specified time fixed by the Court.   Since this point has been raised at a later stage in the writ petition, hence it would be appropriate for the petitioners to move an application under Section 21(8) of the Act before the Prescribed Authority for the purpose of determination of rent from the month of October, 2001 to 2006 according to the guidelines given therein. In so far as the interest part is concerned, the petitioners shall raise this point before the appellate authority.  The respective Courts shall decide the question by a reasoned and speaking order, in accordance with law, within a period of 2 months after filing of the application if raised by the petitioners within a period of one month from today.

    For the reasons stated above, the impugned order is quashed and the writ petition is disposed of accordingly.

Dated 17.7.2007





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.