2008 (5) TMI 750

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... of the proceedings to the appellant, the rent was fixed as Rs.150/- per month under Section 16(9) of the U.P.Urban Buildings (Regulation of Letting, Rent and Eviction) Act, 1972 (`Act' for short) in the year 1985. The respondents initiated proceedings for eviction of the appellant under Section 21(1)(a) of the Act in the year 1998, on the ground that they required the premises for their own use. The Prescribed Authority dismissed the petition for eviction and that was confirmed by the Appellate Authority by dismissing the appeal by the respondents. Feeling aggrieved, the respondents filed a writ petition before the Allahabad High Court under Article 226/227 of the Constitution of India. 3. While admitting the said writ petition file....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... should not itself cross the limits of its authority. 5. In this case, the landlord filed an eviction petition seeking possession on the ground that they bona fide required the suit premises for their own use. The said request was rejected both by the Prescribed Authority and by the Appellate Authority. The landlord therefore approached the High Court challenging the said rejection by filing a writ petition. The prayer in the writ petition was for quashing the orders of the Prescribed Authority and the Appellate Authority and for grant of an order of eviction. There was no prayer for a direction for payment of any rent or for payment of any increased rent. When the grievance in the writ petition was only in regard to refusal of an order ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....in other cases. Further, where the rent is increased reasonably, having regard to the fact that the interim direction is purely a temporary arrangement during the pendency of he writ petition, it is possible that this Court might have refused to interfere under Article 136 of the Constitution of India. Every wrong or doubtful exercise of jurisdiction does not call for grant of special leave, particularly if the order has not resulted in any injustice. In fact, in several cases, this Court has set aside the similar interim directions for payment of excessive rents. 8. We should however note the distinction between cases where a writ petition is filed by the tenant challenging the order of eviction and seeking stay of execution thereof, an....