SHIAMA SHANKER SHARMA Vs. THE RENT CONTROL AND EVICTION OFFICER AND ANR.
LAWS(ALL)-1967-2-20
HIGH COURT OF ALLAHABAD
Decided on February 06,1967

Shiama Shanker Sharma Appellant
VERSUS
The Rent Control And Eviction Officer And Anr. Respondents

JUDGEMENT

R.S. Pathak, J. - (1.) The Petitioner is the owner of a house, No. 356/1, Model Town, Ghaziabad. He resides in one part of it. The other part was let out to a tenant, A.B. Hajela. The Petitioner came to know in May, 1966 that Hejela was intending to vacate the accommodation and anxious to secure possession of that accommodation for his own use, the Petitioner applied for its release in his favour. However, that application was not made until June 3, 1966 before which date an allotment order had already been made on May 24, 1966 by the first Respondent, the Rent Control and Eviction Officer, in favour of the second Respondent, S.P. Singh Chaudhry. The Petitioner now applies for an order quashing the allotment order.
(2.) The power to make an allotment order arises by virtue of Sec. 7(2) of the U.P. (Temporary) Control of Rent and Eviction Act, 1947 when an accommodation is or has fallen vacant or is about to fall vacant. Now, in the instant case, it is clear that the allotment order was made in anticipation of the fact that the accommodation would become vacant. The order was made on May 24, 1966 and as appears from paragraph 9 of the counter -affidavit of S.P. Singh Chaudhry, the accommodation was vacated by Hajela on June 6, 1966.
(3.) The Petitioner says that there was no power to make the impugned allotment order because it was necessary that there should be a notice in writing from the landlord or the tenant to the District Magistrate that the accommodation was about to fall vacant and no such written notice was sent in the instant case. The Petitioner says that he inspected the record but was unable to find any information by Hajela that he was going to vacate the accommodation. The Petitioner's contention is founded on the submission that an accommodation about to fall vacant is deemed by Sec. 2(h) to be "vacant" for the purposes of the Act only after intimation that it is about to fall vacant has been sent by the landlord or the tenant to the District Magistrate. It is urged that the obligation to send such intimation is created by Sec. 7(1), which speaks of a notice in writing. Unless a written notice has been sent an accommodation about to fall vacant cannot be deemed to be "vacant.";


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