Moti Ram v. Bahuddeshiya Prathmik Gramin Sahkari Samiti
Case at a glance
- Order date
- 17 Jul 2025
- Neutral citation
- 2025:AHC:115922
Provisions considered
Judgment
Hon'ble Saral Srivastava,J.
Heard learned counsel for the petitioners.
The petitioners have come up in the present petition with a sole prayer that a direction be issued to Rent Authority/Additional District Magistrate (Finance and Revenue), Shamli to decide the Case No.147 of 2024, Computerized Case No.D202409720000147 (Moti Ram Vs. Bahuddeshiya Prathmik Gramin Sahkari Samiti Limited (B PACCS) and another) filed under Section 21(2)(M) 4(3) of U.P. Regulation of Urban Premises Tenancy Act, 2021 pending before him expeditiously within a time bound period.
Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, without adverting into the merits of the case, the writ petition is disposed off with a direction to Rent Authority/Additional District Magistrate (Finance and Revenue), Shamli to decide the Case No.147 of 2024, Computerized Case No.D202409720000147 (Moti Ram Vs. Bahuddeshiya Prathmik Gramin Sahkari Samiti Limited (B PACCS) and another) filed under Section 21(2)(M) 4(3) of U.P. Regulation of Urban Premises Tenancy Act, 2021 pending before him expeditiously, preferably within a period of six months from the date of production of certified copy of this order without granting any unnecessary adjournments to either of the parties.
In case if any adjournment is inevitable, the authority concerned may grant the same by imposing heavy cost which may not be less than Rs.1,000/-. Order Date :- 17.7.2025 Mohit MOHIT KUMAR KUSHWAHA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
Questions this judgment answers
Which statutory provisions did this judgment involve?
Urban Premises Tenancy Act, 2021.
Which court decided this case, and when?
Allahabad High Court, on 17 Jul 2025.
Precedent status how later indexed judgments have treated this case
No known negative treatment found in the Courts & Cases corpus.
This is a result about the indexed corpus, not a finding that the judgment remains good law. Coverage may be incomplete.