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


Munni Devi v. Adj & Others - WRIT - A No. 35012 of 1993 [2006] RD-AH 13509 (17 August 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).


Civil Misc. Writ Petition No. 35012 of 1993

Smt.Munni Devi Katiyar Vs. II Addl.Distt.& Sessions Judge and


Hon. Sanjay Misra, J.

Heard Sri A.K.Sachan, learned counsel for the petitioner.

This Civil Misc.Writ Petition has been filed against the judgment and order dated 16.8.1993 passed in Criminal Revision No.110 of 1993 Sri Ramendra Singh Katiyar Vs. Sri Radhey Shaym Katiyar and others, by IInd Additional District and Sessions Judge, Kanpur Nagar.

From a perusal of the order passed by the Magistrate as also the revisional court it appears that this writ petition arises out of the proceedings under Code of Criminal Procedure  and not under U.P.Urban Buildings( Regulation of Letting, Rent and Eviction ) Act 1972.  However, from  a perusal of the  interim order dated 30.8.1993 it appears that the petitioner has obtained the  order on the ground as stated in the said interim order which is quoted hereunder:-

" A perusal of the impugned order dated 3.5.1993, annexure no.4 to the writ petition, passed by the Magistrate, shows that the Magistrate had released the disputed property in favour of the landlady, the petitioner. Against this order a revision was filed which was heard and decided by II Addl.District & Sessions Judge, Kanpur Nagar whereby  the revision was allowed with the finding that the Magistrate had no jurisdiction to declare the premises vacant and release it in favour of the landlady, the petitioner in this writ petition."

It is quite apparent from the above that the interim order passed was on the basis that the Magistrate had no jurisdiction to declare the premises vacant and release it in favour of the landlady. A perusal of the order of the Magistrate indicates that on an application made before him he has directed the police authorities to either remove the lock of the room and give permission to the petitioner and also  the items belonging to the absconding accused  persons be given in the


supurdagi of some person. It does not appear to be an order declaring vacancy or an order of release as contemplated by U.P. Act No.XIII of 1972.  The citation by the revisional court regarding powers of a Magistrate to declare a vacancy or pass a release order of a tenanted premises was totally uncalled for in the facts of this case. In proceedings arising out of an FIR the said order has been passed which has been set aside by the revisional court in a Criminal Revision under section 397 of the Code of Criminal Procedure mainly on the ground that the petitioner is also an accused and handing over the premises and  items of the accused persons  under her supurdagi  or her husband's supurdagi was improper. In view of the aforesaid the interim order dated 30.8.1993 is vacated.

Learned counsel for the petitioner prays for and is allowed two weeks' time to convert this Civil Misc.Writ Petition as a Crl. Misc. Writ Petition in accordance with the Rules of  Court.




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.