G.P.MATHUR - (1.) This writ petition under Art. 226 of the Constitution has been filed praying that a writ of mandamus be issued directing the Kanpur Development Authority to give possession of plot No. 32, block O, Govind Nagar Scheme I, to the petitioner in pursuance of deed of exchange executed on 25-2-1999.
(2.) The case of the petitioner is that prior to enforcement of U.P. Urban Planning and Development Act, 1973, the development of building sites in Kanpur was done by Kanpur Development Board, which had been constituted under U.P. Nagar Mahapalika Adhiniyam. The Kanpur Development Board acquired land, and after developing the same let out plots on long-term lease. The petitioner claims that plot No. 47-B, Block J. Govind Nagar, was allotted to him though the date of allotment is not mentioned, and according to the terms and conditions of the allotment, he deposited one-fourth of the cost of the plot forthwith and the remaining three fourth was to be paid in instalments. However, the physical possession of the said plot was not delivered to the petitioner and, as such, he did not deposit the balance three fourth amount. After the enforcement of U.P. Urban Planning and Development Act, 1973, a development authority known as Kanpur Development Authority (hereinafter referred to as the KDA) was constituted which became successor-in-interest of the Kanpur Development Board. The petitioner approached the KDA for delivery of possession of the plot, but it was revealed that the same had been illegally occupied by a third person who had also raised construction over the same. The KDA had also introduced a scheme for providing an alternate plot and in pursuance thereof the petitioner deposited the balance amount along with the interest and, therefore, a deed of exchange was executed0 on 25-2-1999, under which plot No. 32, Block O, Govind Nagar Scheme I, was allotted in his favour and the deed was registered on 23-3-1999. Even after registration of the deed, the possession of the plot was not delivered to him though he made several represenations in this regard. The principal relief claimed in the writ petition is that the respondent may be directed to deliver the possession of the plot allotted to the petitioner.
(3.) The respondents have contested the writ petition on the ground, inter alia, that plot No. 47B, block J. Govind Nagar, had never been allotted to the petitioner nor any lease deed of the said plot was executed in his favour. The deed of exchange under which the lease deed of plot No. 32 block O, Govind Nagar Scheme I, was executed in favour of the petitioner on 25-2-1999, had been obtained by playing fraud and in collusion with the lower stall of the KDA. According to the respondents, the aforesaid deed of exchange is a void document as neither plot No. 47-B, block J. Govind Nagar had been allotted nor any lease deed of the said plot had been executed in favour of the petitioner.;