PURSHOTTAM DAS MAHROLIA Vs. SANJAY KANCHAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard Sri Ramendra Asthana, learned counsel for the petitioner and Smt. Rama Goel Bansal, learned counsel for respondents.

(2.) The petitioner has preferred the present petition challenging the order dated 21.12.2019 passed by Prescribed Authority/Judge Small Causes Court, Jhansi whereby application 47Ka of the petitioner praying for his impleadment in P.A. Case No.2 of 2018 has been rejected.

(3.) The brief facts of the case are that respondent no.1, Sanjay Kanchan, preferred release application, which was registered as P.A. Case No.2 of 2018 (Sanjay Kanchan Vs. Piyush Sengar), under Section 21(1)(a) of the U.P. Act No.13 of 1972 for release of three houses described in the plaint. The respondent no.4 Smt. Bhagwati Devi is the tenant of house no.193, 193/1, 193/2, new number 439 and the present number 635 (hereinafter referred to as ''suit property') situated at Civil Lines, Jhansi. According to the averments made in the release application, the suit property was allotted to respondent no.4 by the Rent Control and Eviction Officer, Jhansi in the year 1974-75 and she had been living in the suit property as tenant. The need set up by the landlord is that respondent no.1, who is an Advocate, needs space for the chamber near the district court. It is also stated that family of respondent no.1 requires the suit property as they are facing a lot of inconvenience at the present place of their residence.