ABDUL GHAFOOR Vs. BRIJ MOHAN AND OTHERS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This is tenant's writ petition arising out of release proceedings initiated by landlord respondent under Sec. 21 of U.P. Act No. 13 of 1972. The release application was registered as Rent Control Case No. 20 of 1997 and was allowed by Prescribed Authority/IIIrd Additional Civil Judge (SD), Bulandshahr through judgment and order dated 25th May, 1998. Tenant-petitioner filed appeal under Sec. 22 of the Act against the said judgment and order being Rent Control Appeal No. 20 of 1998, XIIth Additional District Judge, Bulandshahr through judgment and order dated 19th May, 2001 dismissed the appeal hence this writ petition.

(2.) Both the Courts below have found the need of the landlady respondent for the shop in dispute to be bona fide. Landlady pleaded that in the shop in dispute she intended to set her grandson for starting computer business. Learned Counsel for the petitioner has argued that several other commercial accommodations are available to the landlady. Both the Courts below have discussed all the accommodations pointed out by the tenant and have come to the conclusion that none of the said accommodations is actually vacant. Regarding comparative hardship Courts below have held that one of the sons of tenant is doing business from another shop. Apart from it tenant did not show as to what efforts he made to search alternative accommodation after filing of the release application.

(3.) In my opinion findings of bona fide need and comparative hardship recorded in favour of the landlord-respondent by both the Courts below do not require any interference by this Court in exercise of writ jurisdiction.