NOORALI ABDULLA MODI Vs. SURESH MOTILAL TALERJA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Substitution, as prayed for, is allowed.

(2.) This special leave petition is against an order of the High court dismissing a petition under Article 226 of the Constitution. The High court, in our view, was right in rejecting the petition because the relief sought was the enforcement of a promise alleged to have been made by the owner of the building in question to accommodate the petitioner by providing him with an alternative accommodation. Whether or not any such promise was made or, if made, whether it was enforceable is a question which is not capable of being agitated in proceedings under Article 226 of the Constitution.

(3.) The petitioner had also in the writ petition in the High court sought relief against the Urban Land Ceiling Authority which had deleted a provision to the effect that an alternative accommodation would be given to the petitioner in the newly constructed building.