DR. VISHNU DUTT SHARMA Vs. SHYAM LAL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard learned Counsel for the parties. This petition by the landlord is directed against concurrent judgments dated 6.10.2006 and 15.9.2007 by which his release application has been rejected by both the Courts below.

(2.) The petitioner filed an application for release of the disputed shop under section 21(1)(a) of U.P. Act No. 13 of 1972 which was registered as P.A. Case No. 12 of 2003 inter alia with the allegation that he was the owner and landlord of the disputed premises wherein the father of the respondent was tenant whereafter the respondent became tenant at Rs. 126.50 per month. It was further stated that the petitioner was working as Assistant Research Officer (Homeopathic) at Central Council for Research in Homeopathic under the Ministry of Health, Government of India from where he retired on 30.6.2000. It was further stated that he was a disabled person having disability of 40% and after his retirement he wants to demolish the shop and reconstruct to run a Modern Homeo Clinic to treat the polio, mentally retorted patient etc. and thereby rehabilitate himself also. After the parties had led their evidence both the Courts below rejected the application.

(3.) Learned Counsel for the petitioner has urged that the Appellate Court did not consider the need set up by the petitioner solely on the ground that the need as set up was not covered by the provision of section 21(1)(a) and therefore, it could not be bona fide and thus the appellate judgment is vitiated and the matter should be referred for decision afresh on merits.