DINESH KUMAR Vs. DISTRICT JUDGE ETAWAH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) SUDHIR Narain, J. The writ petition is directed against the order of the appel late authority dated 19-7-1986 allowing the appeal and dismissing the release ap plication filed by the landlord-petitioner.

(2.) THE landlord-petitioner filed an application for release of the disputed ac commodation against Respondent No. 2 in the year 1982 with the allegations that he is living in a tenanted accommodation and requires the disputed accommodation for his residential purposes. It was stated that the disputed property has come to his share after partition. THE father of Respondent No. 2, Sri Shyam Lal, was a tenant and after his death his other brothers were residing outside and Respondent No. 2 only opted to live in the house in question.

(3.) HARI Prakash, claiming himself as co-tenant filed affidavit before the appel late authority but he never alleged that his brother, Ram Sewak colluded with the landlord or he was prejudiced in the case, as he was not impleaded as party. The Prescribed Authority had already passed order of eviction against the tenant on the ground that need of the landlord was bona fide. He could not show that there was any error in the judgment or his brother has not properly contested the matter.