BHAGWAT SARAN S/O LATE PRAMCHAND vs SMT SHANTI DEVI W/O ASHOK KUMAR SIKKA — 17/2022

Case under Code of Civil Procedure Section 43. Disposed: Contested--DISPOSED on 06th March 2026.

Misc. Civil Appeal

CNR: UPMO010047522022

Case disposed

Filing Number

377/2022

Filing Date

16-05-2022

Registration No

17/2022

Registration Date

16-05-2022

Court

District and Session Judge

Judge

5-Addl. District and Sessions Judge Court No. 3 Moradabad

Decision Date

06th March 2026

Nature of Disposal

Contested--DISPOSED

Acts & Sections

CODE OF CIVIL PROCEDURE Section 43

Petitioner(s)

BHAGWAT SARAN S/O LATE PRAMCHAND

Adv. ATAR SINGH

Respondent(s)

SMT SHANTI DEVI W/O ASHOK KUMAR SIKKA

Hearing History

Judge: 5-Addl. District and Sessions Judge Court No. 3 Moradabad

06-03-2026

Disposed

25-02-2026

Hearing

19-02-2026

Hearing

16-02-2026

Hearing

09-02-2026

Hearing

Final Orders / Judgements

06-03-2026
ORDER

Summary The Additional Sessions Court, Moradabad dismissed the appellant's petition to deposit rent under Section 30(1) of the U.P. Rent Control Act, 1972, and accepted the respondent's counter-petition on April 25, 2022. The appellate court upheld this order, finding no legal error, as the appellant's status as a mere licensee (not a tenant) and the existence of a pending eviction suit against him rendered rent deposit provisions inapplicable. The court confirmed that the appellant cannot claim statutory rent protection once eviction proceedings have been initiated. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

casestatus.in Summary

Summary The Additional Sessions Court, Moradabad dismissed the appellant's petition to deposit rent under Section 30(1) of the U.P. Rent Control Act, 1972, and accepted the respondent's counter-petition on April 25, 2022. The appellate court upheld this order, finding no legal error, as the appellant's status as a mere licensee (not a tenant) and the existence of a pending eviction suit against him rendered rent deposit provisions inapplicable. The court confirmed that the appellant cannot claim statutory rent protection once eviction proceedings have been initiated. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Browse Related Cases

More from this court

District and Session Judge All courts →

Explore other courts

Search Another Case