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


Sardar Ahamd v. Addl. District Judge - WRIT - A No. - 41041 of 2007 [2007] RD-AH 15108 (6 September 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.07

Civil Misc. Writ Petition No.41041 of 2007

Sardar Ahmad Vs. Additional District Judge/ Fast Track Court 2, J.P. Nagar and others


Civil Misc. Writ Petition No.41044 of 2007

Sardar Ahmad Vs. Additional District Judge/ Fast Track Court 2, J.P. Nagar and others

Hon'ble S.U. Khan, J.

First writ petition arises out of eviction suit filed by the landlord against the petitioner tenant and second writ petition arises out of release application filed by the landlord against the petitioner tenant.

First, I take the second writ petition. Release application was registered as P.A. Case No.07 of 1998 on the file of Prescribed Authority,J.P. Nagar. Prescribed Authority/ Civil Judge, Senior Division, J. P. Nagar allowed the release application on 18.11.2004. Against the said order, tenant petitioner filed P.A. Appeal No.04 of 2004. A.D.J./ F.T.C. 2, J.P. Nagar dismissed the appeal on 25.07.2007, hence second writ petition. The need set up in the release application by the original respondent landlord Fazal Ahmad was that his youngest son Musharraf Ali had passed M.A. and was not doing any job, hence shop in dispute was required for him. Musharraf Ali passed M.A. in 1983 and he was married in 1982 and at the time of filing of the petition, he was having two infant children. It was also stated that after the death of original tenant Shafi Ulla, his sons were doing other business. Tenant could not point out that Musharraf Ali was doing any service or business. The tenant had suggested that Musharraf Ali being M.A. could start coaching in his house. Unfortunately, tenant is not entitled to suggest the way of earning to the landlord. It was stated in the release application that Musharraf Ali intended to start dairy business from the shop in dispute for which he had obtained licence also. Landlord had pointed out that several shops were vacant for being taken on rent by the tenant, however tenant did not make any effort to take any shop. I do not find any error in the finding of bona fide need and comparative hardship in the impugned order. Rent of the shop in dispute was claimed by the landlord to be Rs.40/- per month. However in the eviction suit both the courts below found that the rent was Rs.15/- per month.

Accordingly, I do not find any error in the impugned judgments challenged through the second writ petition, hence it is dismissed.

Tenant-petitioner is granted six months time to vacate provided that :-

1. Within six weeks from today petitioner tenant files an undertaking before the Prescribed Authority to the effect that on or before the expiry of aforesaid period of six months he will willingly vacate and handover possession of the property in dispute to the landlord-respondents.

2. For this period of six months, which has been granted to the tenant-petitioner to vacate, he is required to pay Rs. 3,000/-(at the rate of Rs. 500/- per month) as rent/damages for use and occupation. This amount shall also be deposited within six weeks before the J.S.C.C. and shall immediately be paid to the landlord-respondents.

In case of default in compliance of any of these conditions tenant-petitioner shall be evicted through process of Court after one month. It is further directed that in case undertaking is not filed or Rs.3,000/- are not deposited within six weeks then tenant-petitioner shall be liable to pay damages at the rate of Rs. 1,000/- per month since after one month till the date of actual vacation.

Similarly, if after filing the aforesaid undertaking and depositing Rs.3,000/- the accommodation in dispute is not vacated on the expiry of six months then damages for use and occupation shall be payable at the rate of Rs. 1,000/- per month since after six months till actual vacation.

As far as first writ petition is concerned, it arises out of eviction proceedings initiated by landlord in the form of S.C.C. Suit No.21 of 1988. J.S.C.C., J.P. Nagar dismissed the suit on 19.04.2001. Landlord filed S.C.C. Revision No.08 of 2001. A.D.J./ F.T.C. 2, J.P. Nagar allowed the revision on 25.07.2007 and directed eviction of the tenant. The said order has been challenged through the first writ petition. However, as in the second writ petition, eviction order on the ground of bona fide need has been upheld, hence no useful purpose will be served by judging the validity of the Revisional Court's order in respect of eviction on the ground of default. As far as rate of rent is concerned, version of the tenant has been accepted.

Accordingly, first writ petition is dismissed.

However, while dismissing the second writ petition, petitioner has been granted six months' time. For six months', petitioner shall not be evicted in pursuance of impugned judgment dated 25.07.2007 passed by Revisional Court in S.C.C. Revision No.08 of 2001.




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.