SHASHI GUPTA Vs. VTH ADDITIONAL DISTRICT JUDGE BULANDSHAHR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) YATINDRA Singh, J. This is a writ petition against the orders dated 31-5-2001 and 24-11-1997 passed by respondent Nos. 1 and 2 in proceedings under Section 21 of U. P. Urban Buildings (Regulation of Letting, Rent and Eviction) Act, 1972 (the Act) releasing the shop in question in favour of the landlord mentioned as opposite party II set namely respondent Nos. 3 to 11 (the landlords ).

(2.) ONE Mukundi Lal was tenant of the shop in question. He died in the year 1970 and his heirs became tenant in the shop in dispute. The landlords filed a release application in the year 1979 under Section 21 (a) of the Act, in this application all the heirs of Mukundi Lal were made party. Petitioner is also daughter of Mukundi Lal and is his heir. She was also impleaded but no guardian was appointed. This should have been done as she was minor at that time. This application was partly allowed on 5-10- 1997 and half of the shop was released in favour of the landlords and remaining half was to be left with the tenants. Both the sides filed appeal. These appeals were decided by the Appellate Court on 20-11-1980. The appeal of the tenants was dismissed and appeal of the landlords was allowed.

(3.) THE Appellate Court had remanded the case on 31-5-1991 on the ground that the affidavits could not be taken into account without there being order of the Court. After remand the landlord filed an application namely application No. 59-Kha on which no objection has taken. This application was allowed on 20-10-1997 taking the affidavits to be taken on record. This order is neither filed before this Court nor it is challenged. This point has no force in view of the fact that Court has already allowed the affidavits to be taken into account, and this order is not challenged. THE petitioner had opportunity to file documents or evidence in rebuttal. She has done so. THE reasonable procedure has been adopted. THE first point raised by the petitioner has no substance.