High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
Case Law Search
Ravindra Prakash v. Additional District & Session Judge And Another - WRIT - A No. - 51056 of 2007  RD-AH 16696 (12 October 2007)
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
Civil Misc. Writ Petition No.51056 of 2007
Ravindara prakash Vs. Additional District and Sessions Judge and another
Hon'ble S.U. Khan, J.
Heard Sri T.S. Pandey, learned counsel for the petitioner tenant and Sri R.K. Singh and Sri S.N. Singh, learned counsel for the landlord respondent No.2 Prakash Azad, who have appeared through caveat.
Landlord-respondent No.2 filed release application under Section 21 of U.P. Urban Buildings (Regulation of Letting, Rent & Eviction) Act, 1972 in the form of P.A. Case No.05 of 2004. The application was allowed on 30.04.2007 by Prescribed Authority, Allahabad. Against the said judgment and order, petitioner has filed R.C. Appeal No.94 of 2007, which is pending before A.D.J., Room No.2, Allahabad. In the appeal, petitioner filed an application stating therein that landlord was asserting that he was residing in a flat of his friend, hence landlord must be directed to supply the name and parentage of the said friend. The Appellate Court rejected the application on 24.09.2007 by observing that said facts were pleaded before Prescribed Authority and were dealt with by the court below and there was full opportunity to press such type of application before the Prescribed Authority. The said order has been challenged through this writ petition.
Property in dispute is a residential house, area is stated to be about 574 sq. yard and it contains four rooms and other aminities.
Yesterday, I asked the leanred counsel for the contesting respondent to inform the Court about the name of the owner of the house/ flat in which landlord is at present residing. Today, learned counsel for the landlord respondent No.2 states that tenant may create troubles for the person, who has given his house/ flat to the landlord to reside, hence he may not be compelled to disclose the name of the said person. Even yesterday, there was no compulsion and information was sought only with a view to decide the controversy, which appeared to be too trivial.
Accordingly, writ petition is disposed of with the direction to the Appellate Court to decide the appeal expeditiously. Appellate Court may draw such inference as may be warranted in law from the refusal of the landlord to disclose name and particulars of the person in whose house/ flat, landlord is at present residing.
It is further directed that until disposal of the appeal, dispossession of the tenant petitioner in pursuance of judgment and order dated 30.04.2007 passed by the Prescribed Authority, which is underchallenge in the appeal, shall remain stayed provided that w.e.f. October, 2007 onwards he deposits rent before the Appellate Court for immediate payment to the landlord respondent No.2 by 7th of each succeeding month @ Rs.2000/- per month.
This direction is being issued in view of the Supreme Court authority of Atma Ram Properties Vs. Federal Motors, 2005 (1) SCC 705.
Double Click on any word for its dictionary meaning or to get reference material on it.