SURESH CHANDRA @ SURESH PAL Vs. SARNA DEVI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) BY filing the present writ petitions, the petitioners seek to issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of certiorari quashing the impugned judgment dated 19.08.2009, passed by Addl. District Judge / IV F.T.C., Dehradun, in Rent Control Appeal no. 95 of 2006.

(2.) RESPONDENT no. 1 filed a release application in the court of Prescribed Authority / Civil Judge (Sr. Div.), Dehradun under Section 21(1)(a) of the U.P. Urban Buildings (Regulation of Letting, Rent and Eviction) Act, 1972 (as applicable in Uttarakhand) for the need of her son, daughter -in -law, widowed daughter and her grand children. Learned Civil Judge (Sr. Div.) dismissed such release application, vide judgment and order dated 05.06.2006. Aggrieved against the judgment, passed by the Prescribed Authority / Civil Judge (Sr. Div.), in P.A. Case no. 53 of 2001, titled as Smt. Sarna Devi vs Suresh Chandra alias Suresh Pal and others, a rent control appeal, bearing no. 95 of 2006, was preferred by the landlady. The appeal was allowed by learned Addl. District Judge / IV F.T.C., Dehradun, vide order dated 19.08.2009. The judgment and order dated 05.06.2006, passed by Civil Judge (Sr. Div.) in P.A. Case no. 53 of 2001, was set aside. The appellant was directed to comply with second proviso to Section 21(1)(a) of the U.P. Urban Buildings (Regulation of Letting, Rent and Eviction) Act, 1972 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act'). Feeling aggrieved against the impugned judgment and order dated 19.08.2009, two separate writ petitions were filed on behalf of the petitioners, which are being decided by this common judgment and order for the sake of brevity and convenience.

(3.) SMT . Sarna Devi is the owner of property situated at 202, Block II, Chukhuwala, Dehradun. The petitioners are the tenants in their respective portions. Whereas Suresh Chandra is the tenant in portion 'A', Sukhbir Singh is the tenant in portion 'B' as shown at the foot of the application for release. In the release application, it was stated that Suresh Chandra is carrying the business of making and selling of furniture at the monthly rent of Rs. 50/ -. Another writ petitioner Sukhbir Singh is a tenant in one room on a monthly rent of Rs. 100/ -. It was the case of landlady in her release application, that she has a large family and she has to support her son, daughter -in -law, widowed daughter and her two children and two married daughters, who often visit her. She urgently required additional accommodation to provide proper and comfortable living rooms and kitchens etc. for her children, who are facing great inconvenience and hardship on account of shortage of accommodation. The release application was contested by the tenants -writ petitioners, who filed their written statements, wherein they admitted their tenancy, but denied the claim of the landlady.