DINESH KUMAR Vs. IIIRD ADDITIONAL DISTRICT JUDGE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS petition is directed against concurrent orders passed by the Courts below rejecting an application filed by the petitioner who is the landlord of the disputed shop under Section 21(1)(a) of U.P. Act No. 13 of 1972.

(2.) THE application was filed on assertion that the applicant No. 1 Dinesh Kumar has read only upto 5th class. He left studies in 1967. Thereafter, he worked for sometime as a Home Guard. Now he has been somehow managing to do business in betel, cigarettes and general merchandise in the staircase of his house. The staircase is far too small for the business purposes of the said petitioner. In order that he may effectively carry on, business it was necessary that the disputed shop be released in his favour. The tenant on the other hand is a man of substantial means. He has large landed property and he would not suffer if evicted from the disputed accommodation.

(3.) BOTH the authorities have rejected the application of the landlords.