GYAN PRAKASH Vs. RAM KUMAR GOEL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Tenant petitioner, herein, has invoked supervisory jurisdiction of this Court under Article 227 of the Constitution of India assailing the judgment and order dated 19.01.2013 passed by Appellate Court / District Judge, Dehradun in Rent Appeal No. 101 of 2012 whereby release application of the landlord / respondent, herein, moved under Section 21 (1) (a) of the U.P. Act No. 13 of 1972, seeking eviction of tenant from the shop, in question, on the ground of bona fide need of the landlord to establish / settle his son namely Sri Sankalp Goel to do computer business therein was allowed.

(2.) Brief facts of the present case, inter alia, are that landlord respondent, herein, has moved one application under Section 21 (1) (a) of the U.P. Act No. 13 of 1972 before the Prescribed Authority / Civil Judge (Senior Division) Dehradun stating therein that shop no. 15, Gandhi Chowk, Mussorriee was let out to Sri Jagdish Prasad on month to month tenancy basis wherein Sri Jagdish Prasad was carrying on his business in the name and style M/s Chajju Mal Jagdish Prasad; original tenant Sri Jagdish Prasad has expired leaving behind Gyan Prakash petitioner, herein, and Lajwanti, as legal heirs being his natural son and daughter; Lajwanti is married and is not residing in Mussorrie; after death of his father, petitioner alone has started business in the tenanted shop; family of the landlord respondent, herein, is consisting of landlord aged about 62 years; his wife Smt. Renu Goel, aged about 53 years, his elder son Sri Ashish, aged about 32 years and his younger son Sri Sankalp, aged about 27; Sri Sankalp Goel, younger son of landlord, is Master in Computer Application, therefore, landlord wants to settle his son Sri Sankalp Goel in the tenanted shop; it is the pious duty of the landlord to settle his unemployed son Sri Sankalp Goel in the shop, in question; Sri Sankalp Goel, after getting the shop vacant, shall start computer business in the shop, in question. It was further stated that Sri Sankalp Goel is neither a Government Servant nor gainfully employed, therefore, he has to establish his computer business in the shop, in question.

(3.) Tenant petitioner, herein, contested the release application, stating therein that landlord has absolutely no bona fide need to settle his son Sri Sankalp Goel in the shop, in question. It was further stated that Sri Sankalp Goel is gainfully employed. During the evidence, it was stated before the court that Sri Sankalp Goel was earlier in service with an international firm and thereafter, he left the service and started his business in the name and style "Kranti Software" in Noida. Initially, release application so moved by respondent was rejected by the Prescribed Authority, however, same was allowed by the Appellate Authority vide impugned judgment dated 19.01.2013. Feeling aggrieved, tenant petitioner, herein, has invoked supervisory jurisdiction of this Court under Article 227 of the Constitution of India.