KUSUMLATA JAIN Vs. IST ADDL DISTRICT JUDGE JHANSI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) YATINDRA Singh, J. The petitioner is landlord of the premises in dispute. He filed an application for release of the premises in dispute under U. P. Urban Buildings (Regulation of Letting, Rent and Eviction) Act, 1972 (the Act ). Respondent No. 2 (the contesting respondent) is tenant of the same. Dying pendency of this application the petitioner also offered two alternative accommodations to the contesting respondent. After considering the facts and circumstances of the case the application of the petitioner was allowed on 28- 4-1980. The contesting respondent filed an appeal which was allowed on 13-11-1987. Hence the present writ petition.

(2.) I have heard Sri B. N. Agrawal Counsel for the petitioner and the Sri A. N. Bhargava Counsel for the contesting respondent. The petitioner has offered alternative accommodation which was earlier occupied by two bank officials namely Shri Shukla and Tiwari. The Prescribed Authority after considering this alternative accommodation had recorded finding in favour of the petitioner. The appellate Court has refused to look into the alternative accommodation offered by the petitioner in one line saying that this offer was not bona fide. There is nothing on the record to show that offer was not bona fide.