HANUMAN PRASAD Vs. RAM CHANDER AND ANOTHER

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard Counsel for the petitioner. None appears for the contesting respondent even in the revised list. Perused the record. The Petition No. 38317 of 2005 is directed against an appellate order dated 23.4.2005 by which the landlord's appeal against an order rejecting his release application has been partly allowed and one shop has been released in his favour.

(2.) It appears that the respondents-landlord were both in service in the Indian Army and on the retirement of respondent No. 1 in 1998, he moved an application for release of the disputed two shops which were in the tenancy of the petitioner-tenant on the ground of his personal need and also on the ground of the need of the co-landlord No. 2 Jagdish Chander who was still serving in the army.

(3.) After contest, the application was rejected against which the respondent preferred an appeal and the appeal has been partly allowed by releasing one shop out of the two shops in the name of Ram Chander holding that the need of respondent No. 2 Jagdish Chander was not established.