SHIVKUMAR Vs. SAJIDA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Delay condoned.

(2.) Leave granted.

(3.) Haji Baqridan, the predecessor-in-interest of Respondent 1 Sajida (since deceased) and Respondent 2 Mohd. ldris moved a petition under Section 21 of the U. P. Urban Buildings (Regulation of Letting, Rent and Eviction) Act, 1972 (Act No. 13 of 1972 (hereinafter referred to as the Act) for release of the shop in question and for eviction of the appellant and Respondent 4 Ram Roop, on the ground that Ram Roop Respondent 4, who was a tenant of the said premises, had vacated the premises and inducted the appellant herein in the said premises. In the petition for eviction bona fide requirement of accommodation to run business for his sons in the absence of alternative accommodation was pleaded as one of the grounds. The petition was resisted both by the original tenant i. e. Respondent 4 and the appellant herein. The prescribed authority vide judgment and decree dated 22/12/1979 found that the bona fide requirement of the landlord had been established on the basis of the evidence led by the parties. A decree directing the appellant and Respondent 4 to deliver possession of the premises to the landlord was accordingly passed. Aggrieved by the judgment and decree of the prescribed authority dated 22/12/1979, the appellant filed an appeal before the 2nd Additional District Judge. Ram Roop Respondent 4, the original tenant however, did not question the eviction order. The appellate authority vide judgment and decree dated 18/11/1980 allowed the appeal and set aside the judgment and decree of the prescribed authority. The landlord Haji Baqridan then filed a civil miscellaneous writ petition in the High court challenging the judgment of the appellate authority. During the pendency of the proceedings in the High court, Haji Baqridan died and his widow Ms Sajida Respondent 1 and son Mohd. ldris Respondent 2 were substituted as his legal heirs and brought on record. Later Respondent 1 Sajida, widow of Baqridan, also died and since Mohd. Idris her son was already on record the index was corrected. The High court allowed the writ petition and quashed the judgment and decree dated 18/11/1980 passed by the 2nd Additional District Judge, Jaunpur and restored that of the prescribed authority. Hence this appeal by the appellant.