ANIL KUMAR AND ANOTHER Vs. ADDITIONAL DISTRICT JUDGE, VTH LUCKNOW AND OTHERS
LAWS(ALL)-2006-7-290
HIGH COURT OF ALLAHABAD
Decided on July 14,2006

Anil Kumar And Another Appellant
VERSUS
Additional District Judge, Vth Lucknow And Others Respondents

JUDGEMENT

Rakesh Sharma, J. - (1.) Heard Sri Anil Kumar, learned Counsel for the petitioners.
(2.) No one has responded, nor put in appearance on behalf of the respondents despite notices sent. As per office report dated 24.2 2006, service of notices on the respondents has been treated to be sufficient. This is an old case pending in this Court since 1996. The release application was filed in December, 1986. About twenty years have passed after institution of the litigation, hence it would not be in the interest of justice to keep the litigation alive for years to come.
(3.) It emerges from record that originally the house No. 551-Jha/217, Ram Nagar, Alambagh, Lucknow was owned by one Devi Deen who had written a will in respect of a portion of the said house in favour of the petitioners. After the death of Devi Deen, the petitioners became absolute owner of the said portion of the house. The shop in question in the tenancy of the respondents is a wooden Gumti kept in the verandah of the aforesaid house. The petitioner No. 1, who is physically infirm and is also uneducated, wanted to do some business from the said Gumti/shop to earn his livelihood. He had put a wooden Takht on the footpath, adjacent to his house to sell betel, etc. The petitioner No. 2 is his younger brother. Their father Sri Ram Prasad Sharma has also retired on attaining the age of superannuation. The father and two sons, namely, petitioners No. 1 and 2, wanted to settle themselves in life and start business in their own shop/Gumti put in the verandah of their own house. Accordingly, a release application was submitted before the Prescribed Authority in December, 1986. In the application, the landlords had indicated their genuine and bona fide need and the circumstances under which the two sons and retired father were living. As indicated above, one of the landlords Anil Kumar, petitioner No. 1 is physically infirm and uneducated and he was in urgent need of establishing himself. The other members of the family were also concerned about his welfare and establishment in life.;


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