NAKUL KUMAR Vs. CHAMPA DEVI
LAWS(ALL)-2000-2-30
HIGH COURT OF ALLAHABAD
Decided on February 22,2000

NAKUL KUMAR Appellant
VERSUS
CHAMPA DEVI Respondents

JUDGEMENT

- (1.) SUDHIR Narain, J. This writ peti tion is directed against the order dated 24-8-1999 passed by the prescribed authority whereby he allowed the release application and the order of the appellate authority dated 11-1-2000 dismissing the appeal against the said order.
(2.) THE landlady-respondent filed ap plication for release of the disputed shop against the petitioner with the allegations that she requires the disputed shop for her son Surendra Kumar Jaiswal to establish him in business. THE petitioner contested the application. THE prescribed authority recorded a finding that the son of the' landlady Surendra Kumar Jaiswal requires the disputed shop for carrying on business. This finding has been affirmed by the ap pellate authority. I do not find any legal infirmity in the finding. The next submission of the learned counsel for the petitioner is that the landlady has two vacant shops. He has relied upon a report of the Commissioner dated 28-4-1995. He had submitted a report that there were four shops marked by him Aa Ba Sa Da. None of these shops are vacant. The disputed shop is shown by letter Ba. Learned counsel for the petitioner contended that there are two rooms Ra and La which are of commercial use. Learned counsel for the respondent contended that this report was not ac cepted by the authorities below. He, how ever, made statement that he is prepared to provide the room shown by letter La in the said report of the Commissioner as alternative accommodation. Learned counsel for the petitioner has accepted this offer. In view of the statement made by the learned counsel for the parties and the offer made to the petitioner to provide the room shown by letter La in the said report of the Commissioner, the writ petition is partly allowed to the extent that if the landlady-respondent gives possession of the room La, the petitioner shall vacate the disputed shop. The landlady-respon dent shall provide the room La within two weeks from today and on providing such room, the petitioner shall vacate the dis puted shop and hand over it to the landlady-respondent. In case there is any difficulty/dispute the matter will be decided by the prescribed authority regarding the execution of the order passed by this Court. Petition partly allowed. .;


Click here to view full judgement.
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.