MAHENDRA KUMAR JAIN Vs. PRESCRIBED AUTHORITY (RENT CONTROL)/MUNSIF SITAPUR
LAWS(ALL)-1993-11-99
HIGH COURT OF ALLAHABAD
Decided on November 03,1993

MAHENDRA KUMAR JAIN Appellant
VERSUS
Prescribed Authority (Rent Control)/Munsif Sitapur Respondents

JUDGEMENT

H.N.TILHARI,J. - (1.) By this petition, the petitioner has challenged the order dated 24-5-1986, passed by Shri S.K. Tripathi, Prescribed Authority (Rent Control), Munsif, Sitapur, whereby the Prescribed Authority has rejected the petitioner's application for substitution, namely, application No. 48 Ga and 61 Ka and allowed the substitution of the names of opposite parties 3 and 4 in place of Smt. Jamuna Devi (deceased.)
(2.) Brief facts of the case are that one Smt. Jamuna Devi had moved an application under Section 21(1)(a), U.P. Urban Buildings (Regulation of Letting, Rent & Eviction) Act (U.P. Act No. XIII of 1972) hereinafter called as the Act. The application for release was pending and during the pendency of the application, Smt. Jamuna Devi, had died. On account of death of Smt. Jamuna Devi, the application for substitution had to be moved. An application 48 Ka had been moved by one Jayanti Prasad i.e. opposite party No. 2 to the writ petition claiming himself to be the heir of Smt. Jamuna Devi on the basis of a will alleged to have been executed by Smt. Jamuna Devi in his favour. The second application i.e. application 53 Ka had been moved by opposite parties 3 and 4 to the present writ petition who asserted that they were the heirs of Smt. Jamuna Devi being the sons of the brother of the husband of Smt Jamuna Devi, as has already peen mentioned in the pedigree, as mentioned in the application and referred to in the judgment of the Prescribed Authority.
(3.) Opposite parties 3 and 4 further claimed themselves to be entitled to the property left by Smt Jamuna Devi as well as to be substituted in place of Smt. Jamuna Devi on the basis of a registered will that opposite parties 3 and 4 alleged, to have been executed in their favour by Smt. Jamuna Devi. The third application for substitution 61 Ka had been moved by the present petitioner Mahendra Kumar Jain who had also claimed himself to be entitled to succeed the property of Smt. Jamuna Devi on the basis of certain will which is alleged to have been executed by Smt. Jamuna Devi in his favour.;


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