SARVESH KUMAR Vs. RAJEEV KUMAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The landlords have filed this petition for quashing the judgment and order dated 9th April, 2010 by which the Appeal filed by the tenant for setting aside the order dated 9th November, 2006 of the Prescribed Authority allowing the application filed by the landlord under section 21(1)(a) of the U.P. Urban Buildings (Regulation of Letting, Rent and Eviction) Act, 1972 (hereinafter referred to as the 'Act') for release of the shop, was allowed and the order dated 9th November, 2006 passed by the Prescribed Authority was set aside.

(2.) The Prescribed Authority found that the landlords had not demolished the tenanted shop but the shop which was in a bad condition had fallen down due to heavy rains and the applicants who were educated unemployed and sitting idle needed the tenanted shop to start their business particularly when applicant No. 1 was married and had two children and the tenant had not made any effort to search out any alternative accommodation after the filing of the release application by the landlords. The Prescribed Authority, therefore, allowed the application filed by the landlords by the order dated 9th November, 2006 holding that the landlords bona fide required the shop for doing business and that the landlords were likely to suffer greater hardship in case the shop was not released.

(3.) This order of the Prescribed Authority was assailed by the tenant by filing an Appeal under section 22 of the Act. This Appeal was initially allowed by the judgment and order dated 25th July, 2008 and the matter was remanded to the Prescribed Authority. This order was assailed by the landlords in Writ Petition No. 45912 of 2008 which was allowed by the judgment and order dated 17th February, 2009 for the reason that the Appellate Court itself could decide the matter since evidence was available on the record. The judgment and order dated 17th February, 2009 is quoted below: