SIYA RAKM VARMA Vs. POORANMAL VERMA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard Sri T.P. Singh, learned Senior Advocate assisted by Sri Narendra Singh, learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri Manas Bhargava, learned Advocate holding brief of Sri Rajiv Lochan Shukla, learned counsel for the respondents.

(2.) By means of this petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution, the petitioner has questioned the correctness of the judgment of the Prescribed Authority in holding the building to be in a dilapidated condition so as to release the same in favour of landlord under Sec. 21(1) (b) of the Uttar Pradesh Urban Buildings (Regulation of Letting, Rent and Eviction) Act, 1972 (hereinafter to be referred as 'Act No. 13 of 1972').

(3.) It is argued on behalf of the petitioner before this Court that the two technical reports were placed before the Prescribed Authority, one in favour of landlord and the other one in favour of tenant. The Prescribed Authority rejected both the reports and directed Advocate Commissioner's report. The Advocate Commissioner did submit a report before the Prescribed Authority after conducting inspection without the help of any technical expert and just only on the basis of visual inspection made by him while he inspected the building. This report was neither supported by any map made for the said purpose, nor the report was accompanied by any photograph of the building, and hence petitioner filed a detailed objection to the Advocate Commissioner's report questioning the authenticity of report itself. This objection remained pending consideration before the Prescribed Authority while the matter was finally heard, whereas, the objection submitted over report remained pending for orders.