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


Krishan Gopal Garg v. Special Judge/Addl. District Judge & Others - WRIT - A No. 27015 of 2001 [2006] RD-AH 14654 (29 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).


Hon'ble Rakesh Tiwari, J

Heard Sri Rajiv Joshi counsel for the petitioner and Sri P.K. Jain counsel for the respondents.

This writ petition has been filed against the orders dated 5.7.2001 and 16.11.2000 passed by respondent nos. 1 and 2 respectively.

By order dated 16.11.2000, application of the petitioner under Section 10 of the Civil Procedure Code was rejected on the ground that it was not maintainable. The petitioner preferred revision, which has also been dismissed vide impugned order dated 5.7.2001.  Aggrieved, the petitioner has come up in this writ petition.

This Court, on 24.7.2001 at the stage of admission had passed the following orders:-

"ek0 ;rhUn flag] U;k0ew0

;kph dk dFku gS fd mlus ,d vkosnu Ik=k flfoy izfdz;k lafgrk dh /kkjk 1`0 o 151 ds vUrZxr nh Fkh fd okn la0 177@93 ds fu.kZ; gksus rd fdjk;k fu;Ur.k vf/kdkjh dh dk;Zokgh LFkfxr dh tkos rRi'pkr U;k;ky; us bl vkosnu Ik=k dks [kkfjt dj fn;k ysfdu [kkfjt djrs le; xq.k nks"k ds vk/kkj ij fu"d"kZ vafdr fd;k fd ;kph vuhf/kd`r #Ik ls dkfct gS A ;g ckr mulds vkosnu Ik=k ds /kkjk 10 o 151 flfoy izfdz;k lafgrk ds vUrxZr ugha dh tkuh pkfg, ij I{kdkjksa ls lk{; dk volj nsus ds Ik'pkr gh vfHkfyf[kr fd;k tkrk pkfg, FkkA

uksfVl tkjh gks A

izfri{kh la0 1 rFkk 2 dh vksj ls foOnku LFkkbZ vf/koDrk us uksfVl Lohdkj fd;k gS A izfri{kh la[;k 3 yxk;r 5 ls jftLVMZ esa uksfVl tkjh gks A izfri{kh la0 3 rk 5 ij uksfVl rkehy gks tkus ds Ik'pkr bls izkjfEHkd gsrq lwphc) gks A

bl chp bl pkfpdk ds vxyh lwphc) gksus rd okn la0 36@98 vEczhl dqekj xxZ izfr uRFkh jke ,oa vU; tks fd fdjk;k fu;Ur.k ,oa fu"iknu vf/kdkjh eqtQQjuxj ds U;k;ky; esa yfEcr gS dh dk;Zokgh LFkfxr jgsxh

                                        g0 vLi"V""

Counsel for the petitioner submits that order passed under Section 10 of the Code of Civil Procedure has become final and evidence has also been led in the case.  However, by the impugned orders, he has been declared as an unauthorized occupant.


Sri P.K. Jain , counsel for the respondents submits that the proceedings have been stayed by the aforesaid interim order as such, the landlord is suffering great hardship.  

Counsels for the parties agree that the matter requires fresh consideration by respondent no. 1.

Accordingly, the writ petition is allowed. Impugned orders dated 5.7.2001 and 16.11.2000 passed by respondent nos. 1 and 2 respectively are quashed.  The matter is remanded to the respondent no. 1 with the direction to decide the proceedings afresh without being infludence by findings recorded in the impugned orders dated 5.7.2001 and 16.11.2000.  No order as to costs.

Dated 29.8.2006



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.