Judgments
Judgments
  1. Home
  2. /
  3. High Court Of Judicature at Allahabad
  4. /
  5. 2019
  6. /
  7. January

Ramesh Chandra Agrawal vs State Of U.P. Thru Prin. Secy. ...

High Court Of Judicature at Allahabad|30 August, 2019

JUDGMENT / ORDER

Hon'ble Jaspreet Singh,J.
Heard Sri R.P. Awasthi, learned counsel for the petitioner, Sri Anand Singh, learned Standing Counsel for the respondent no. 1 and Sri Ratnesh Chandra, learned counsel for the respondent nos. 2 to 4.
By this writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India the petitioner is praying for issuance of writ of mandamus directing the respondent nos. 2 and 3 to restrain the respondent nos. 5 to 13 from raising illegal construction of the building as the map of the said building is not approved by the Lucknow Development Authority.
It is not in dispute that petitioner is a tenant of the private respondents and he has filed civil suit being Civil Suit No. 328 of 2018 (Ramesh Chandra Vs. Vijay Kumar and others) before the Civil Judge (J.D.), District Lucknow for grant of permanent injunction in respect of the rented shop in question and learned trial court has allowed the prayer of petitioner and granted temporary injunction in favour of the petitioner by directing the parties concerned to maintain status-quo.
Now the grievance of the petitioner before this Court is that the private respondents are flouting the aforesaid injunction order and trying to construct the building over the disputed land in question.
From perusal of the record it is clearly reflected that the dispute in question is in between the petitioner and private respondents and in this regard a civil suit is engaging the attention of learned trial court wherein status-quo order has been passed. On due consideration of the aforesaid, we are of the view that if the private respondents are flouting the order of learned trial court then the appropriate remedy for the petitioner is to approach the learned Court who has passed the order of status-quo by filing an application under Order 39 Rule 2-A of the C.P.C.
Consequently, in the facts of the case, in so far as we are concerned, we are not entertaining the present writ petition but we leave it open to the petitioner to avail the appropriate remedy by filing an application under Order 39 Rule 2-A of the C.P.C.
Writ petition is, accordingly, dismissed.
[ Jaspreet Singh, J. ] [ Pankaj Kumar Jaiswal, J. ] Order Date :- 30.8.2019 Shekhar
Disclaimer: Above Judgment displayed here are taken straight from the court; Vakilsearch has no ownership interest in, reservation over, or other connection to them.
Title

Ramesh Chandra Agrawal vs State Of U.P. Thru Prin. Secy. ...

Court

High Court Of Judicature at Allahabad

JudgmentDate
30 August, 2019
Judges
  • Pankaj Kumar Jaiswal
  • Jaspreet Singh