ACHAL MISRA versus RAMA SHANKER SINGH AND ORS.

ACHAL MISRA versus RAMA SHANKER SINGH AND ORS.

The Supreme Court held that the High Court erred by holding that failure to challenge the vacancy declaration immediately precluded a later challenge in revision against the allotment order. Such a vacancy declaration is a preliminary order and can be challenged alongside the final allotment order; election of remedies applies. Matter is remanded to the High Court for fresh disposal including the question of propriety of vacancy declaration and effect of cancellation of allotment.

Parties
Appellant/assignee Landlord: Achal Misra; Respondent No. 1/allottee (ground Floor): Rama Shanker Singh; Respondent No. 2/allottee (first Floor): Raj Singh
Jurisdiction
India
Judgment Date
11 April 2005
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Appeal From High Court Judgment, Writ Petition Remanded
Outcome
Appeal allowed; High Court writ petition decision set aside; writ petition remanded for fresh hearing.
Legal Topics
Vacancy Declaration, Allotment of Property, Revision and Appeal, Interlocutory Orders, Mesne Profits
Rent Control Property Law Civil Procedure Vacancy Declaration Allotment of Property Revision and Appeal Interlocutory Orders Mesne Profits

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Legal principles 4 Authorities cited 12 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 4
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Achal Misra

Appellant/assignee Landlord

Rama Shanker Singh

Respondent No. 1/allottee (ground Floor)

Raj Singh

Respondent No. 2/allottee (first Floor)

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Appeal From High Court Judgment, Writ Petition Remanded

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the order declaring vacancy, not challenged immediately, precludes challenge in subsequent revision against allotment order
  2. 2 Proper procedure for declaration of vacancy and allotment under Uttar Pradesh Urban Buildings (Regulation of Letting, Rent and Eviction) Act, 1972 and Rules
  3. 3 Entitlement and liability for rent, mesne profits, and arrears by allottees during litigation

Ratio Decidendi

The Supreme Court held that the High Court erred by holding that failure to challenge the vacancy declaration immediately precluded a later challenge in revision against the allotment order. Such a vacancy declaration is a preliminary order and can be challenged alongside the final allotment order; election of remedies applies. Matter is remanded to the High Court for fresh disposal including the question of propriety of vacancy declaration and effect of cancellation of allotment.

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed; High Court writ petition decision set aside; writ petition remanded for fresh hearing.

Orders

  • Respondent No. 1 to tender Rs. 3,50,000 and pay Rs. 1200 per month plus water and drainage tax from 1.5.2005.
  • Respondent No. 2 to tender Rs. 3,00,000 and pay Rs. 1000 per month plus water and drainage tax from 1.5.2005.