SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2014 Supreme(UK) 418

IN THE HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL
Alok Singh, J

Dhruv Narain Bansal and others - Petitioners
Versus
Municipal Board, Ramnagar - Respondent
Writ Petition No. 2205 of 2013 (M/S)
Decided on : 2.5.2014

Advocates:
Advocate Appeared:
Mr. Anirudh Bhatt, Advocate for the petitioners.
Mr. B.D. Pande, Advocate for the respondent.

An appeal under Section 9 of the U.P. Public Premises Act is only maintainable if an order of eviction or direction to pay arrears of rent is issued under Section 5 or Section 7 of the Act. Additionally, an application seeking condonation of delay in filing a non-maintainable appeal is not maintainable.

Headnote:

U.P. Public Premises Act - Appeal - Section 9

Fact of the Case:

The petition challenges the order condoning a delay of more than 13 years in filing an appeal under Section 9 of the U.P. Public Premises Act, which was filed to contest the rejection of notices issued under Section 4 of the Act.

Finding of the Court:

The court found that the appeal under Section 9 was not maintainable as no order of eviction or direction to pay arrears of rent was issued, rendering the appeal not maintainable. The court also held that the application seeking condonation of delay in filing the non-maintainable appeal was not maintainable.

Issues: The main issue was the maintainability of the appeal under Section 9 and the application seeking condonation of delay.

Ratio Decidendi: The court held that an appeal under Section 9 is only maintainable if an order of eviction or direction to pay arrears of rent is issued under Section 5 or Section 7 of the Act. The court also emphasized that an application seeking condonation of delay in filing a non-maintainable appeal is not maintainable.

Final Decision: The writ petition was allowed, and the impugned order condoning the delay in filing the appeal was quashed.

Judgment :


Present petition is filed assailing the order dated 5.7.2013 passed by District Judge, Nainital, whereby learned District Judge, Nainital was pleased to condone the delay of more than 13 years in filing the appeal under Section 9 of U.P. Public Premises Act.

2. Brief facts of the present case, inter alia, are that on the application of respondent, herein, learned Prescribed Authority was pleased to issue notices to the petitioners under Section 4 of the U.P. Public Premises Act, however, ultimately, learned Prescribed Authority, vide judgment dated 30.6.1998, was pleased to reject the notices issued under Section 4 of the Act. Thereafter, respondent, herein, on 9.8.2013 filed an appeal under Section 9 of the U.P. Public Premises Act, assailing the judgment and order dated 30.6.1998 passed by the Prescribed Authority dismissing/rejecting the notices issued against the petitioners under Section 4 of the U.P. Public Premises Act, along with the application under Section 5 of the Limitation Act seeking condonation of delay in filing the appeal, which was allowed by the impugned judgment.

3. I have heard Mr. Anirudh Bhatt, learned counsel for the petitioners and Mr. B.D. Pande, learned counsel for the respondent, and have carefully perused the record.

4. Mr. Anirudh Bhatt, learned counsel appearing for the petitioners submits that appeal itself was not maintainable under Section 9 of the U.P. Public Premises Act, therefore, learned Appellate Court was absolutely not having any jurisdiction to condone the delay under Section 5 of the Limitation Act in filing the appeal, which itself was not maintainable.

5. To appreciate this submission made by Mr. Anirudh Bhatt, learned counsel for the petitioner, Sections 5, 7 and 9 of the U.P. Public Premises Act are being reproduced hereunder:

“5. Eviction of unauthorised occupants. - (1) If, after considering the cause. if :any, shown by any person in pursuance of a notice under Section 4 and any evidence he may produce in support of the same and after giving him a reasonable opportunity of being heard, the Prescribed Authority is satisfied that- the public premises are in unauthorised occupation the Prescribed Authority may make an order of eviction for reason to be recorded therein, directing, that the public premises shall be vacated, on such date as may be specified the order, by-all persons who may be in occupation thereof, or any part thereof, and cause a copy of the order to be affixed on the outer door or some other conspicuous part of the public premises.

(2) If any person refuses or fails to comply with the order of eviction within thirty days of the date for its publication under Sub-section (1), the Prescribed Authority or any other officer duly authorised by the Prescribed Authority in this behalf may evict that person from, and take possession of, the public premises and may, for that purpose, use such force, as may be necessary.

* * *

7. Power to require payment of rent or damages in respect of public premises. - (1) Where any person is in arrears of rent for four months payable in respect of any public premises, the Prescribed Authority may, by order, require that person to pay the same within such time and in such installments as may be specified in the order, and on the failure of such person to pay the same or any installments thereof, he shall be deemed to be in unauthorised occupation of The public premises.

(2) Where any person is, or has at any time been, in unauthorised occupation of any public premises, the Prescribed Authority may, having regard to such principles of assessment of damages as may be prescribed assess he amount of damages on account of the use and occupation of such premises and may by order, require that person to pay the amount within such time and in such installment as may be specified in the order.

(3) No order under Sub-section (1) or Sub-section (2) shall be made against any person until after the issue of a notice in writing to the per

















Click Here to Read the rest of this document

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
Judicial Analysis

AI

SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

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

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top