GAYA PRASAD Vs. PRADEEP SRIVASTAVA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Leave granted.

(2.) This case presents a sample scenario of the tormenting plight of an average litigant who approaches the Court with all expectations of getting relief for his urgent need. But the snail paced litigation creeping through all the tiers of the judicial hierarchical forums would have frustrated all his expectations, though others could admire the tenacity with which he persisted with the cause. Twenty three years ago, the litigant in this case wanted accommodation for his son, who then became a medical graduate, to start a clinic so that from the stage of a fledgling in the profession of medicine he could fly higher up. His father who owns the building moved for eviction of the tenant from the building for the said purpose. Although he won the battle at all tiers the urgently needed eviction is till now eluding him as a mirage.

(3.) Appellant is the tenant of a shop building situate at Khalsa Gali, Agra. In 1978, the respondent-landlord filed an application under Section 21(1)(a) of the U. P. Urban Buildings (Regulation of Letting, Rent and Eviction) Act, 1972 (for short 'the U. P. Act') on a twin need. One is that his son who passed his medical examination wanted to carry on medical practice and this building was needed for housing his clinic. The other is, the landlord himself had just retired from Railway service and he too did not want to waste his time, talent and energy and hence he wanted to start a radio repairing work which he thought could be performed by using a portion of the building. The first forum, called Prescribed Authority, where the application was filed, found the claim bona fide and ordered eviction on 25-3-1982. It was further found by the said authority that the tenant has alternative accommodation in the same city for doing his business.