AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
The petitioner is aggrieved by an order passed u/s 11 DDA whereby certain properties have been provisionally attached. After hearing the counsel for the parties, we find that the petitioner is not admittedly owner of the land. The learned counsel for the petitioner, then, submits that the petitioner is having leasehold rights. The lease deed is annexed along with the petition and we find that the lease deed is in favour of Mr. Vijay Kumar Agarwal one of the Directors of M/s. Parmarth Iron Private Limited. Therefore, the lessor, Mr. Lalit Kumar Agarwal is not absolute owner of the property instead Mr. Vijay Kumar Agarwal who is lessee is the owner of the property.
Considering the above, we are clearly of the view that the present writ petition is not maintainable either at the instance of lessor or lessee. The real owner of the petitioner firm should approach this Court and that will be considered.
In the light of that, we are not inclined to exercise the extraordinary writ jurisdiction. The aforesaid writ petition is dismissed.