SANJAY KUMAR MAHESHWARI v. SMT SAROJ GARG AND 5 OTHERS
WRIA/9830/2025 · 2025-07-30
Chandra Kumar Rai
body2025
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 75919 (ALL) · dailylaw.ai ]
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 75919 (ALL) · dailylaw.ai ]
Judgment text
Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.
Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:127640 Court No. - 37 Case :- WRIT - A No. - 9830 of 2025 Petitioner :- Sanjay Kumar Maheshwari Respondent :- Smt Saroj Garg And 5 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Madhav Jain Counsel for Respondent :- Rishikesh Tripathi Hon'ble Chandra Kumar Rai,J.
1. Heard Mr. Madhav Jain, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. Rishikesh Tripathi, learned counsel for respondent no.2. 2. Brief facts of the case are that two appeals were filed before the Appellate Court by the respective tenant which were registered as appeal Nos. 241 of 2022 and 261 of
2022. Both the appeals were dismissed by separate order dated 18.4.2025. Against the order dated 18.4.2025 passed in appeal No. 241 of 2022, Writ A No. 7567 of 2025 filed by respondent nos. 3 to 4/2 was allowed by order dated 28.5.2025 setting aside the appellate order dated 18.4.2025 passed in misc. appeal No. 241 of 2022 and matter was remitted back before the appellate authority to decide the appeal No. 241 of 2022 afresh. 3. The instant petition has been filed for the following relief:-
"To issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of certiorari to quash the judgement and order dated 18.4.2025 passed by the Additional District Judge, Court No. 8 Agra in Rent Control Misc. Appeal No. 261 of 2022 as well as judgement and order dated 26.8.2022 passed by the Prescribed Authority in P.A. Case No. 34 of 2016 renumbered as case No. 121 of 2020 (Smt. Saroj Garg and others Vs. Om Prakash Maheshwari and others) and pass order to implead the petitioner as party to P.S. Case No. 34 of 2016 renumbered as case No. 121 of 2020 to afford opportunity have his say in the case."
4. Counsel for the petitioner submitted that in view of the earlier order dated 28.5.2025 passed in Writ A No. 7567 of 2025, the instant petition should also be allowed setting aside the appellate order dated 18.4.2025 passed in appeal No. 261 of 2022. 5. Mr. Rishikesh Tripathi, learned counsel for respondent no.2 submitted that in view of the earlier order passed by this Court, the matter should be sent back before the appellate authority to decide both the appeals together afresh on merit. 6.
Considering the facts and circumstances of the case coupled with the fact that earlier Writ A No. 7567 of 2025 was allowed by this Court vide order dated 28.5.2025 setting aside the appellate order dated 18.4.2025 in appeal No. 241 of 2022, the instant writ petition is also liable to be allowed. 7. Considering the entire facts and circumstances of the case, the writ petition is allowed and the appellate order dated 18.4.2025 passed in appeal No. 261 of 2022 is set aside. The matter is remitted back before the appellate Court to decide the appeal No. 261 of 2022 along with appeal No. 241 of 2022 after affording opportunity of hearing to both the parties expeditiously within the time bound period as fixed by this Court and direction already issued in writ A No. 7567 of
2025. Order Date :- 31.7.2025 Vandana Y. Digitally signed by :- VANDANA YADAV High Court of Judicature at Allahabad