Back
ALOK MATHUR
Ram Bachani – Appellant
Versus
Additional District Judge Lucknow – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
(Alok Mathur, J.)
1. By means of the present writ petition, the petitioner has challenged the order dated 13.10.2009 passed by Additional District Judge, Lucknow thereby dismissing the appeal against the order passed by the prescribed authority under the Public Premises Act, 1971 (herein after referred to as the ‘Act of 1971’) and also the order dated 03.10.2002 passed by the Prescribed Authority/Estate Officer, Central Bank of India, Zonal Officer, Bhopal.
2. The facts necessary for deciding present controversy shown any unnecessary details are that the respondent, Central Bank of India, is the landlord of the premises situated at 73, Hazratganj, Lucknow and Jawahar Lal Bhargawa, predecessor in interest of the petitioner was the tenant of the north eastern portion of the ground floor of the said premises. In 1976, the respondent Bank had moved an application for release of the premises in the tenancy of Jawahar Lal Bhargawa before the prescribed authority under the Uttar Pradesh Urban Building (Regulation and Letting and Rent and Eviction) Act, 1972 being in urgent need of the premises. The said application was dismissed by order dated 01.09.1976.
3. Aggrieved by the sai
The court established that subsequent events, such as the death of landlords, must be considered in eviction proceedings to ensure justice and the rightful assessment of bona fide needs.
Suit does not abate upon death of one plaintiff if the right to sue survives; legal representatives need not be substituted if the cause of action continues.
The obligation to bring the legal representatives of a deceased landlord/landlady on record in eviction cases after the landlord's death is governed by Order XXII Rule 4(1) of CPC, as interpreted by ....
High Courts' jurisdiction under Articles 226 and 227 requires proving gross illegality or irregularity for intervention; cancellation of lease upheld based on violations of lease conditions.
PP Act prevails over state rent acts for evicting unauthorized occupants from public premises, including pre-existing tenancies post-acquisition; unauthorized assignment, decades-long rent default, a....
The eviction under the Public Premises Act was upheld as lawful, with sufficient notice and adherence to due process, and claims of bias against the Estate Officer were rejected.
Tenancy rights under a Will cannot override specific contractual terms prohibiting assignment without consent, rendering unauthorized occupation invalid under the Public Premises Act.
Writ jurisdiction under Articles 226 and 227 is limited to reviewing the legality of process rather than re-evaluating facts. Eviction upheld for breaches of lease conditions.
A decree passed against a deceased party is null and void; proper procedure under Order 22 CPC must be followed to avoid automatic abatement.
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
