WAKF COMMITTEE MASZID MANIHARAN Vs. DIST. JUDGE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS writ petition has been filed against the order of the District Judge, Jaipur City, Jaipur dated 24th January 1991. The dispute is in respect of two shops situated at Sanganer for which the proceedings under the Rajasthan Public Premises (Eviction of Unauthorised Occupants) Act, 1964 were taken.

(2.) ONE of the disputes relates with regard to the notice. The relevant provisions are contained under Section 4 of the Act which reads as under :

(3.) ON the question as to whether the notice should have been issued to Ashok Kumar in accordance with the provisions of Section 4, the learned District Judge found that there was no necessity for issuing a separate notice to (sic) hear the learned counsel for the respondents has not been able to point out as to what was his interest in the property and how he has been produced. Ashok Kumar has not appeared in this Court. Once the notice has been issued in the name of firm and is served on any of the partners, it is not necessary that an individual partner should be served separately. Object of notice u/s 4 of the Act of 1964 is that person affected must be made aware of the proceedings proposed to be taken against him. The property is occupied by the firm, service on any one partner is sufficient.