PARASHRAM Vs. NAGAR MAHAPALIKA KANPUR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) :-

(2.) THE present Second Appeal has been filed by the plaintiff. A suit for injunction has been dismissed by the lower appellate court.

(3.) THE other contention of the learned counsel for the appellant, however, seems to have some force. It is true that under sections 293 and 296 of the Nagar Mahapalika Adhiniyam the plaintiff was liable to be evicted without notice by Mukhya Nagar Adhikari of the Nagar Mahapalika. That, however, does not authorise the Mukhya Nagar Adhikari to evict the plaintiff by force. Even if he is to be evicted, he can be evicted only in accordace with law and not by force. In our country law is supreme. No person can take law in his own hand. THE plaintiff can be evicted either by way of filing a suit or under the provisions of U. P. Public Premises (Eviction of Unauthorised Occupants) Act, 1972 or any other law. Learned counsel for the respondent argued that section 296 permits the Mukhya Nagar Adhikari to evict the plaintiff without notice. THEre is no doubt about the same. But there is no procedure prescribed. Obviously he can be dispossessed only by due process of law. By way of illustration, section 23 of the U. P. Urban Buildings (Regulations of Letting, Rent and Eviction) Act, 1972 may be examined. It permits use of necessary force for evicting a tenant. Sub-Sec. (1) of Section 23 of the said Act reads as under : "THE prescribed Authority may use or cause to be used such force as may be necessary for evicting any tenant against whom an order is made under Section 21 or on appeal under section 22, as the case may be, or against any other person found in actual occupation, and for putting the landlord into possession." THEre is no such provision in U, P. Nagar Mahapalika Adhiniyam.