MAHENDRA KUMAR GUPTA Vs. SPECIAL JUDGE ALLAHABAD

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This writ petition is directed against the order dated 16.8.1994 passed by the prescribed authority releasing the disputed shop under Section 21(1)(b) of U. P. Urban Buildings (Regulation of Letting, Rent and Eviction) Act. 1972 (hereinafter referred to as the Act) and the order of the appellate authority dated 31.7.1995 affirming the said order in appeal.

(2.) Respondent Nos. 3 to 6 filed application under Section 21(1)(b) of the Act with the allegations that they had purchased the property from the erstwhile owner of the property under a registered deed on 9.9.1988. The petitioners were already tenants and after the purchase of the property they were tenants of the respondents. The disputed premises was constructed 100 years ago and was in a dilapidated condition. It requires demolition and reconstruction. They have got a plan prepared as contemplated by Rule 17 of the Rules framed under the Act and have sufficient financial capacity to reconstruct the same.

(3.) The petitioners contested the application. It was alleged that Swaraj Prakash Gupta and Omkar Nath were owners of the property. They executed an agreement to sell the disputed property in favour of the petitioner Nos. I to 3 on 23.12,1987 and thereafter they were occupying it in their own right under the agreement. They denied relationship of landlords and tenants between the parties. They further denied that the premises in question was in a dilapidated condition. The prescribed authority, on consideration of material evidence on the record, came to the conclusion that the disputed premises was in a dilapidated condition. The land lord-respondents have complied with the requirements as provided under Rule 17 of the Rules framed under the Act. There was relationship of landlord and tenant between the parties and on these findings the application was allowed by order dated 16.8.1994. The petitioners preferred an appeal against the said order. The appeal has been dismissed by respondent No. 1 on 31.7.1995. These orders have been challenged in the present writ petition.