LAWS(ALL)-1985-1-52

DEVI PRASAD TRIPATHI Vs. JANAK KISHORI MISRA

Decided On January 08, 1985
DEVI PRASAD TRIPATHI Appellant
V/S
JANAK KISHORI MISRA Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This criminal appeal has been filed by Devi Prasad Tripathi, Advocate complainant under section 378(4) Cr. P. C. against the judgment and order of Sri J. Chandra, Special Metropolitan Magistrate Kanpur, in a case No. 1049 of 1971 passed on 29.7.78 dismissing the complaint and thereby acquitting the accused respondents Smt. Janak, Kishori and her husband Ram Baran of the offence under section 31 read with section 26 of the U.P. Urban Buildings (Regulation of Letting, Rent and Eviction) Act XIII of 1972 (hereinafter referred to as the Act.

(2.) The brief facts are as follows_: It is admitted that Devi Prasad Tripathi, Advocate complainant, is the tenant of the premises in question of which Smt. Janak Kishori Misra wife of Ram Baran Misra, is the landlady. The complaint of the complainant is that the landlady had cut off the amenity of electric supply to the premises of the complainant which he was entitled to by virtue of the provisions of section 26 of the Act sub- sec. (1) of said sec. 26 provides: No landlord shall without lawful authority or excuse cut off withhold or reduce any of the amenities enjoyed by the tenant. Section 3 1(1) of the Act provides that: Any person who contravenes any of the provisions of this Act shall be punished on conviction with imprisonment of either description of term which may extend to six months or fine which may extend to five thousand to rupees or with both. Section 33(1) of the said Act provides that no prosecution for an offence punishable under this Act shall be instituted except on a complaint authorised by the District Magistrate. It is said that since the landlady cut off the electricity supply to the premises on tenancy with the complainant so the requisite sanction or authorisation from the District Magistrate to file the present complaint or to initiate the present prosecution was obtained. It was in that background that the complaint was tried by the learned Special Metropolitan Magistrate, Kanpur.

(3.) After Appreciating the evidence on record he recorded acquittal of accused persons and dismissed the complaint.