JAGDISH GIRI Vs. STATE OF U P

JUDGEMENT

(1.) BY means of present writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner -plaintiff has challenged the order passed by the trial Court dated 17th February, 2004 and the order passed by the lower appellate Court dated 28th April, 2004, copies whereof are annexed as Annexure Nos. '1' and '2', respectively to the writ petition.

(2.) HEARD learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner.

(3.) IN rebuttal, the case set up by the respondent -defendant was that the petitioner -plaintiff did not have any prima facie case and it is incorrect to say that the theka has been cancelled by publication of the notification in the newspaper. In fact the petitioner -plaintiff has deposited a sum Of Rs. 60 000/= on 22nd August, 2000 and further and up to 22nd August, 2000, a total sum of Rs. 2,53,000/ - was deposited by the plaintiff. Thereafter the plaintiff deposited Rs. 2,400/= which the plaintiff had realised throughout the period theka was granted, but has not deposited with the Nagar Panchayat concern, and that the petitioner's theka was not cancelled during the period for which it was granted, therefore the petitioner is liable to deposit a Sum of 4.50,000/= and out of Rs. 4,50,000/=, Rs. 45,454/ - has been deposited by the Amin, still a balance of Rs. 1,49,146/= is due with the petitioner -plaintiff for which the necessary recovery certificate has been issued, On the issue of recovery certificate, Rs. 45,454/ deposited by Amin and balance is still Rs. 1,49,146/=, thus the suit is based on incorrect facts.