DR. (SMT.) KESHAV DEVI versus SHRI GIRDHARI LAL PAHWA & ORS.

DR. (SMT.) KESHAV DEVI versus SHRI GIRDHARI LAL PAHWA & ORS.

The allotment order in favour of the appellant was illegal and void for non-compliance with mandatory provisions of sec.17(2); as no notice was given to the landlord (respondent no. 1) occupying part of the building, the District Magistrate was bound to provide such notice and enable the landlord to nominate a tenant of his choice. The subsequent setting aside of the allotment was justified.

Parties
Appellant: Dr. (Smt.) Keshav Devi; Respondent No. 1: Shri Girdhari Lal Pahwa; Respondent No. 4: Additional District Magistrate (Civil Supplies), Lucknow
Jurisdiction
India
Judgment Date
05 November 1986
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Appeal by Special Leave Challenging the Judgment of the Allahabad High Court in Writ Jurisdiction
Outcome
Appeal dismissed with costs.
Legal Topics
Building Allotment, Landlord Tenant Rights, Jurisdiction of District Magistrate, Allotment Proceedings Under U.p. Urban Buildings (regulation of Letting, Rent and Eviction) Act
Land Law Tenancy Rent Control Building Allotment Landlord Tenant Rights Jurisdiction of District Magistrate Allotment Proceedings Under U.p. Urban Buildings (regulation of Letting, Rent and Eviction) Act

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 2 Authorities cited 4 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Dr. (Smt.) Keshav Devi

Appellant

Shri Girdhari Lal Pahwa

Respondent No. 1

Additional District Magistrate (Civil Supplies), Lucknow

Respondent No. 4

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Appeal by Special Leave Challenging the Judgment of the Allahabad High Court in Writ Jurisdiction

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the allotment order dated 4.1.78 was illegal for want of notice to the landlord as required under Section 17(2) of the U.P. Urban Buildings (Regulation of Letting, Rent and Eviction) Act, 1972.
  2. 2 Whether the transferee landlord was entitled to notice and to nominate a tenant of his choice under section 17(2) after becoming owner-occupier of part of the premises.

Ratio Decidendi

The allotment order in favour of the appellant was illegal and void for non-compliance with mandatory provisions of sec.17(2); as no notice was given to the landlord (respondent no. 1) occupying part of the building, the District Magistrate was bound to provide such notice and enable the landlord to nominate a tenant of his choice. The subsequent setting aside of the allotment was justified.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed with costs.

Orders

  • Upholding the High Court's order quashing the allotment in appellant's favour.
  • Directed reconsideration of allotment applications after giving notice to landlord-respondent no. 1.