High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
Case Law Search
Haaji Mukhtar Waseem v. Bareilly Development Authority Thru' Secy. - WRIT - C No. 57201 of 2005  RD-AH 2066 (24 August 2005)
Civil Misc. W.P. No. 57201 of 2005
Hon'ble Sushil Harkauli J.
Hon'ble Vineet Saran, J.
We have heard learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri Shashi Kant Gupta for the respondent.
It is not clear from the record so far as to how much rent and for what period is due from the petitioner.
In the circumstances, as a preliminary order, we require the petitioner to deposit a sum of Rs. 30,000/-, which roughly represents the rent for both the shops for three year period with the respondent-authority within one month from today. If the amount is deposited within the period aforesaid, the operation of the impugned order dated 19.4.2005 will remain stayed. The authority will examine how much more rent is due from the petitioner and give a written notice to that effect to the petitioner and also enclose a copy of that notice along with a counter affidavit to be filed by the respondent-authority, which may be filed within two months. Upon making that deposit of Rs. 30,000/-, the seal of both the shops of the petitioner will be reopened.
Dated : August 24, 2005
Double Click on any word for its dictionary meaning or to get reference material on it.