VIPIN KUMAR Vs. BIMALA KAPOOR
HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND
Click here to view full judgement.
B.S.VERMA, J. -
(1.) HEARD Mr. Sharad Sharma, Sr. Advocate assisted by Mr. Narendra
Bali, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. Arvind Vashisth, learned
counsel for the respondents.
(2.) BY means of this writ petition, the petitioner has sought a writ in the nature of certiorari quashing the impugned judgment and order
dated 9.10.2007 passed by learned District Judge, Haridwar (Annexure -1 to
the writ petition).
(3.) BRIEF facts of the case are that the petitioner moved a release application under Section 21(1)(a) of the U.P. Urban Buildings
(Regulation of Letting, Rent and Eviction) Act, 1972 (for short the Act)
before the Prescribed Authority for release of the shop in dispute. Vide
judgment and order dated 30.9.2006, learned Prescribed Authority allowed
the release application of the petitioner. Being aggrieved, the
tenants/respondents filed a rent control appeal in the court of District
Judge Hardwar being R.C.A. No.132/2006. After hearing the parties and on
perusal of evidence, learned District Judge observed that the earlier
notice dated 3.3.2003 was not filed before the Prescribed Authority, only
subsequent notice dated 4.3.2004 was presented by the landlord/petitioner
and accordingly held that in these circumstances there is no occasion to
consider the bonafide need and comparative hardship of the
landlord/petitioner and ultimately vide impugned order dated 9.10.2007,
learned District Judge allowed the appeal of the tenants/respondents and
dismissed the release application of the landlord/petitioner. Feeling
aggrieved by the impugned judgment and order dated 9.10.2007, the
landlord/petitioner has filed the present writ petition before this Court.
The only controversy which is to be decided by this Court is as to whether notice was required to be given to the tenants in the
proceedings initiated under Section 21(1)(a) of the Act.;
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.