SUSHILA MISHRA Vs. XVIII ADDL DISTRICT JUDGE MEERUT

JUDGEMENT

(1.) O. P. Garg, J. This is tentants' writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitu tion of India whereby the order dated 12- 11-1999 passed in release Petition No. 62 of 1997 under Section 21 (1) (a) of U. P. Act No. 13 of 1972 and the order dated 18-9-2000 passed in Appeal No. 344 of 1999 under Section 22 of the Act have been challenged on the ground that the landlord Nos. 3 and 4 did not have bonafide need to get the residential accommodation released in their favour and in any case if the order of release is maintained the petitioners shall suffer incalculable hard ship.

(2.) COUNTER and Rejoinder affidavits have been exchanged.

(3.) SRI Pankaj Mithal however urged that on account of compelling circumstan ces, the petitioners are not in a position to vacate the disputed accommodation which has been released in favour of the landlords immediately and one year period be allowed to them. SRI Rajesh Ian-don has no objection, if six months' period is allowed to the petitioners to vacate the accommodation in question. After taking into consideration the respective submis sions of the parties counsel and to balance the rights of the parties, I feel that it would be proper if nine months' time is allowed to the petitioners to vacate the accom modation in question. It is, therefore, directed, that the impugned order of release dated 12-11- 1999 as confirmed in appeal on 18-9-2000 shall not be imple mented till 30th September 2001. For the period from 1st January, 2001 to 30th Sep tember, 2001, the petitioners shall paya sum of 100/- (One Hundred) per month as damages to the landlords.