MEERA GUPTA Vs. PRESCRIBED AUTHORITY, KANPUR AND OTHERS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) By means of this petition filed under Art. 226 of the Constitution of India petitioner challenges the validity of the order dated 15.5.2000 passed by the Court below, the Prescribed Authority, whereby the application filed by the petitioner for impleadment as one of the opposite parties in the case pending before the said authority, was dismissed.

(2.) Learned Counsel for the petitioner submits that from the material on record, it was evident that the petitioner had purchased l/8th share in the property in dispute. Reliance in support of this submission is being placed on the documents contained in Annexures 2 and 3 to the writ petition, which are claimed to be the sale deeds.

(3.) The Prescribed Authority rejected the application of the petitioner on the ground that the primary evidence of the transaction of sale in favour of the petitioner was not produced before him. I do not find any illegality or infirmity in the impugned order. It is, however, observed in the interest of justice and equity that in case the petitioner has got original sale deeds or the certified copies thereof in her possession, the petitioner shall be at liberty to file another application before the Prescribed Authority supported by an affidavit and the original sale deeds or the certified copies thereof. In case such an application is filed, the same shall be decided on merits in accordance with law ignoring the impugned order dated 15.5.2000, after affording opportunity of hearing to the parties.