BABU LAL SAHU Vs. DISTRICT JUDGE JHANSI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) HEARD learned counsel for the petitioner.

(2.) THIS writ petition has been filed for a direction to respondents no. 1 and 2 not to proceed further in proceedings under section 24 of U P. Act No. 13 of 1972 which have been initiated on the application of respondents no. 3 to 5. Further it has also been prayed that the orders dated 29th May, 1992 and 20th October, 1992 passed by Prescribed Authority and the appellate authority be quashed.

(3.) IN my opinion, since petitioner filed an affidavit and gave undertaking to reconstruct the shop in dispute and to hand over possession of the same to the tenants within the time fixed by the court and the court acting on the said affidavit, directed tenants to hand over possession, which has been complied with by tenants. The petitioner is bound to reconstruct the shops and hand over possession of the same to tenants towards compliance of the order. The landlord petitioner has admittedly obtained possession and has demolished the shops and at this stage he can be permitted to raise pleas to avoid compliance of the order. Learned counsel for petitioner submitted that one son of the petitioner has filed a partition suit in which order has been passed directing petitioner to maintain status-quo and in view of the order of civil court petitioner has not been able to raise construction. Appellate authority has considered this aspect and has repelled the same with the finding that no effort has been made on the part of the petitioner to get the order of the civil court vacated and the suit appears to the collusive. IN my opinion, appellate authority is fully justified in taking the aforesaid view in the facts and circumstances of the case.