GUNENDRA KUMAR JAIN Vs. A D J MUZAFFARNAGAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard learned Counsel for the parties. This petition by the tenant is directed against concurrent orders allowing the release application filed by the respondent landlord.

(2.) The petitioner was a tenant of the disputed premises which was purchased by the respondent No. 4 in April, 1989 whereafter he filed an application for release under section 21(1)(b) of U.P. Act No. 13 of 1972 (hereinafter referred to as the Act) for demolition and reconstruction. The Prescribed Authority vide order dated 2.5.1992 allowed the application holding that the premises were in dilapidated condition requiring demolition and reconstruction and the respondent No. 4 had the financial capacity. During the pendency of the appeal, the disputed property was sold by the respondent No. 4 to the respondent No. 3 vide registered sale deed dated 14.8.1996 who was thereafter impleaded. However, the appeal was dismissed vide order dated 9.3.1998 upholding the findings of the Prescribed Authority.

(3.) The petitioner preferred Writ Petition No. 11384 of 1998 and a learned Single Judge of this Court upheld the findings of the Courts below so far as its demolition and reconstruction were concerned. However, in respect to the financial status of the new landlord for fulfilling requirement under Rule 17 of the Rules framed under the Act, it found that the Appellate Court has not discussed it and therefore, it remanded the matter vide order dated 18.3.1999 to the Appellate Court only to consider whether the respondent No. 3 had the financial capacity to complete the construction.