MOHD MAHMOOD ALI Vs. PRESCRIBED AUTHORITY TOWN AREA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) BY means of this writ petition the petitioner has prayed for quashing the order cancelling the lease in favour of the petitioner and also for commanding the respondents not to interfere with the possession of the petitioner over the tank.

(2.) THE petitioner claimed right in the tank on the basis of an agreement contained in Annexure 2 attached with the writ petition which is dated 21-11-1988. According to the petitioner his lease has been cancelled by a non-speaking order and without assigning any reason and that the petitioner has no other alternative remedy.

(3.) AFTER hearing the learned counsel for the petitioner we are not satisfied that the petitioner can get the reliefs claimed in this writ petition. One of the questions raised before us is whether the petitioner gets any right on the basis of the agreement contained in Annexure 2 attached with the writ petition which is not a registered document. In this connection it is necessary to mention the ruling reported in AIR 1977 SC 2149 wherein their Lordships of the Supreme Court have indicated vide para 11 as below :