High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
Case Law Search
Mohd. Mustaqeen & Others v. Distt. Industry Officer & Others - WRIT - C No. 3074 of 1982  RD-AH 4338 (18 October 2005)
WP No. 3074 of 1982
Hon'ble Yatindra Singh, J
Hon'ble RK Rastogi, J
1. Respondent no. 5 took loan from respondent no. 3. For this loan one Mohd Nabi predecessor-in-interest of the petitioners is alleged to have hypothecated the house in dispute. Subsequently, the proceeding for recovery were initiated. Hence the present writ petition.
2. We have heard counsel for petitioners and standing counsel for the respondents. An affidavit alongwith an application has been filed by respondent no. 3. In this it has been mentioned that Mohd. Nabi predecessor-in-interest of the petitioner had expired on 15.1.1960 whereas the loan was taken by respondent no. 5 on 29.8.1965. The affidavit also states that proceedings have been wrongly initiated against the petitioners and this may be dropped. In view of this recovery proceeding against the petitioners is quashed. However, it would be open to respondents to recover the amount from respondent no. 5. With these observations the writ petition is allowed.
Double Click on any word for its dictionary meaning or to get reference material on it.