SHANKAR LAL Vs. IIIRD ADDITIONAL DISTRICT JUDGE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This writ petition has been filed by the landlord for quashing the judgment dated 11.11.1983, passed by IIIrd Additional District Judge, Aligarh, in UPUB Revision No. 87 of 1983, whereby the order of the Rent Control & Eviction Officer declaring vacancy and also releasing the premises in favour of the landlord has been set aside.

(2.) Dispute relates to shop described as No. 7/25, Subhash Road, Aligarh. The original owner and landlord was Vichitra Behari. The premises was in tenancy of Sri Jugal Kishore, who died sometime in August 1998. On the death of Sri Jugal Kishore, the landlord Vichitra Bihari filed an application for declaration of vacancy and release under Section 16 of the U.P. Urban Buildings (Regulation of Letting Rent & Eviction Act, 1972 (for short the 'Act') on the ground that there were no heirs of Sri Jugal Kishore, as mentioned in Paragraph 4 of the application dated 4.9.1978. It was further stated in Paragraphs 5 of the application that after death of Jugal Kishore, the opposite party to the application Sri Kishan Chand had illegally occupied the shop without consent of the landlord and, therefore, he was unauthorized occupant. Kishan Chand filed reply with affidavit to the release application stating that as he had been working along with Jugal Kishore for the last more than 20 years his possession/occupation of the shop in dispute was lawful and with the consent of the landlord, as he had accepted rent from him. It was further alleged in Paragraph 6 of the reply that Jugal Kishore had not died heirless as alleged by the landlord, but had left behind his daughter Smt. Mithilesh Kumari, two grandsons and two grand daughters who were all alive and have succeeded to the tenancy of Jugal Kishore under the Act. The Rent Control and Eviction Officer declared vacancy vide order dated 16.10.1979 and subsequently, vide order dated 26.8.1983 released the premises in dispute in favour of the landlord holding his need to be bona fide. It would be relevant to mention that after declaration of vacancy and before the order of release, Vichitra Bihari, the owner had transferred his ownership rights by means of sale deed dated 19.11.1981 in favour of Shankar Lal, the present petitioner. The orders dated 16.10.1979 and 26.8.1983 were challenged by means of revision under Section 18 of the Act before the District Judge, Aligarh. The revision was transmitted to the Court of IIIrd Additional District Judge, Aligarh who vide judgment dated 11.11.1983 allowed the same and has held that the order declaring vacancy and releasing the premises in favour of the landlord Shankar Lal was illegal and, accordingly, quashed the same. Aggrieved by the judgment of the Revisional Court dated 11.11.1983, the landlord has filed this writ petition.

(3.) I have heard Sri Manoj Kumar Gupta, learned Counsel for the petitioner and Sri Diwakar Rai Sharma, learned Counsel for the respondents.