AMIT KUMAR S/O OM PRAKASH vs PUSHPA GOYAL W/O BRIJNANDAN GOYAL — 216/2025
Case under Rent Recovery Act Section 35. Disposed: Contested--DECIDED on 12th May 2026.
Misc. Civil Appeal
CNR: UPSP010130302025
Filing Number
896/2025
Filing Date
04-Oct-2025
Registration No
216/2025
Registration Date
09-Oct-2025
Court
District and Session Judge
Judge
5-Additional District Judge, C.R. No.1
Decision Date
12-May-2026
Nature of Disposal
Contested--DECIDED
Last updated 28-May-2026
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
-
1.AMIT KUMAR S/O OM PRAKASH
Adv. ANIL KUMAR VERMA
Respondent(s)
-
1.PUSHPA GOYAL W/O BRIJNANDAN GOYAL
Case History
-
Case disposedDisposed
-
12-May-2026
Copy of JudgmentView PDF
Case Summary: 216/2025 Amit Kumar v. Pushpa Goyal & Ors. The Rent Control Appeal Court in Saharanpur set aside the lower court's order dated 04-09-2025, finding that the presiding judge failed to properly examine the legal provisions cited in the tenant's petition before disposing of the case. The appellant-landlord had sought clarification on which statutory provisions under the UP Urban Property (Lease, Rent & Eviction) Act, 2021 the petitioner was invoking for relief. The court held that since different sections (8, 10, 4, 21(2)(A)) carry distinct procedural requirements and remedies, the petitioner must clearly specify which provision governs the case before evidence is heard. The appeal was allowed, the prior order was quashed, and the matter was remitted for proper adjudication. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
-
12-May-2026
Disposed
Additional District Judge, C.R. No.1
-
04-May-2026
For Order
Additional District Judge, C.R. No.1
-
01-May-2026
hearing
Additional District Judge, C.R. No.1
-
27-Apr-2026
hearing
Additional District Judge, C.R. No.1
-
24-Apr-2026
hearing
Additional District Judge, C.R. No.1
-
06-Apr-2026
hearing
Additional District Judge, C.R. No.1
-
28-Mar-2026
hearing
Additional District Judge, C.R. No.1
-
27-Mar-2026
hearing
Additional District Judge, C.R. No.1
-
23-Mar-2026
hearing
Additional District Judge, C.R. No.1
-
12-Mar-2026
hearing
Additional District Judge, C.R. No.1
-
18-Feb-2026
hearing
Additional District Judge, C.R. No.1
-
06-Feb-2026
hearing
Additional District Judge, C.R. No.1
-
23-Jan-2026
hearing
Additional District Judge, C.R. No.1
-
14-Jan-2026
hearing
Additional District Judge, C.R. No.1
-
08-Jan-2026
hearing
Additional District Judge, C.R. No.1
-
06-Jan-2026
hearing
Additional District Judge, C.R. No.1
-
09-Dec-2025
hearing
Additional District Judge, C.R. No.1
-
28-Nov-2025
hearing
Additional District Judge, C.R. No.1
-
10-Nov-2025
hearing
Additional District Judge, C.R. No.1
-
09-Oct-2025
First hearing
Initial hearing scheduled
-
04-Oct-2025
Case filed
Registration No. 216/2025
Case Summary: 216/2025 Amit Kumar v. Pushpa Goyal & Ors. The Rent Control Appeal Court in Saharanpur set aside the lower court's order dated 04-09-2025, finding that the presiding judge failed to properly examine the legal provisions cited in the tenant's petition before disposing of the case. The appellant-landlord had sought clarification on which statutory provisions under the UP Urban Property (Lease, Rent & Eviction) Act, 2021 the petitioner was invoking for relief. The court held that since different sections (8, 10, 4, 21(2)(A)) carry distinct procedural requirements and remedies, the petitioner must clearly specify which provision governs the case before evidence is heard. The appeal was allowed, the prior order was quashed, and the matter was remitted for proper adjudication. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Explore other courts