SURENDRA KUMAR Vs. ADDITIONAL DISTRICT JUDGE NAINITAL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This writ petition is directed against the order passed by respondent No. 1 allowing the appeal and dismissing the release application filed by the landlord-respondent.

(2.) The petitioner is landlord of the shop in question situate at Bajaja Line, Ram Nagar of which respondent No. 2 is tenant. The petitioner filed an application for release of the disputed shop under Section 21 (1) (a) of U. P. Urban Buildings (Regulation of Letting, Rent and Eviction) Act. 1972 (in short 'the Act') with the allegations that there was a family partition under which the disputed shop came to his share. He was engaged in partnership business of selling Sarees with Vijal Kumar, one of his brothers, in the shop which fs owned by his brother but after he got married, the relationship between the two, became strained and now he wants to start his own independent Saree business In the disputed shop. It was stated that the tenant-respondent owns a shop at Kashipur and he can shift his business there. The application was contested by respondent No. 2. It was stated that there was no partition in the family and every member of the family is living Jointly and the petitioner ts carrying on Joint family business. The prescribed authority held that there was genuine partition between the parties and the partition was effected by a decree of civil court. The petitioner does not have any vacant shop of his own to carry on business. His need is bona fide. It was further found that respondent No. 2 has his own shop In Kashipur and in case the application of the petitioner Is rejected he will suffer a greater hardship. The application was allowed on 14.12.1982 on these findings. Respondent No. 2 filed appeal and respondent No. 1 allowed the appeal on 7.5.1983, reversing the findings of the prescribed authority. The petitioner has challenged this order in the present writ petition.

(3.) I have heard Sri Manish Goel, teamed counsel for the petitioner and Sri Rajesh Tandon, learned counsel for the contesting respondent.