Research › Search › Judgment

Allahabad High Court · body

2025 DAILYLAW 166346 (ALL)

DILIP SETHIA AND ANOTHER v. STATE OF U.P. THRU. PRIN. SECY. HOUSING AND URBAN PLANNING LKO AND 3 OTHERS

WRIC/9769/2025 · 2025-10-07

Amitabh Kumar Rai, Sangeeta Chandra

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD LUCKNOW WRIT - C No. - 9769 of 2025 Court No. - 2 HON'BLE MRS. SANGEETA CHANDRA, J. HON'BLE AMITABH KUMAR RAI, J. 1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioners, Shri Aviral Singh, holding brief of Shri Shobhit Mohan Shukla, appears on behalf of the Opposite party no.2, U.P. RERA, and Shri Akhilesh Kumar Srivastava, learned Additional Chief Standing counsel for the respondent nos.1 and 3. 2. For the orders proposed to be passed, issuance of notice to respondent no.4 is dispensed with. 3. This petition has been filed with the following main prayers:- "a) Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus thereby directing the Respondent no.3 to execute aforesaid Recovery Certificate dated 12.01.2021 (Annexure No.8 to this writ petition) within a time period stipulated by this Hon'ble Court. b) Any other order or direction may also be passed by this Hon'ble Court, in favour of petitioner and against the Respondents which this Hon'ble Court deems fit and proper for the sake of justice. " 4. It has been submitted by learned counsel for the petitioners that the petitioners had filed a complaint under Section 18 of the RERA Act, 2016 before U.P. RERA Lucknow, for the delivery of possession of the units for which the petitioners had made the Versus Counsel for Petitioner(s) : Himanshu Hemant Gupta Counsel for Respondent(s) : C.S.C., Shobhit Mohan Shukla Dilip Sethia And Another .....Petitioner(s) State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Housing And Urban Planning Lko And 3 Others .....Respondent(s) entire payment to the developers i.e. Respondent no.4 in M/s Tulsiani Construction & Developers Pvt. Ltd. New Delhi. The complaint of the petitioners has been allowed and a final order has been passed in favour of the petitioners. However, till date, District Magistrate, Lucknow has not taken any action in the matter. 5. Learned Standing Counsel appearing on behalf of the State- respondents has placed before this Court the instructions sent by Sub Divisional Magistrate, Sadar, Lucknow, wherein it has been stated that in pursuance of the recovery certificate dated 12.01.2021 issued by the respondent no.2, a demand letter dated 17.05.2025 has been sent to the respondent no.4, which has also been served upon it. 6. Again, R. C. Form No.38 has been issued on 06.06.2025 for the attachment of the property. The office of the respondent no.4 has also been sealed. A copy of such instructions is kept on record. 7. The writ petition is disposed of with a direction to the District Magistrate, Lucknow, to ensure the execution of the recovery certificate issued by the respondent no.2 within a period of two months from the date a copy of this order is produced before him, provided there is no legal impediment. October 7, 2025 N.PAL WRIC No. 9769 of 2025 2 (Amitabh Kumar Rai,J.) (Mrs. Sangeeta Chandra,J.) Digitally signed by :- NARESH PAL High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench