RAVINDRA KUMAR Vs. KAMLESH CHAND DIXIT

JUDGEMENT

(1.) HEARD learned Counsel for the parties.

(2.) THE petitioner, by means of this writ petition, has challenged the order passed by the prescribed authority which has been affirmed by the appellate authority under the provisions of Act No. 13 of 1972 (hereinafter referred to as the Act).

(3.) THE prescribed authority arrived at the conclusion that the landlord bona fide need the accommodation for his residential purposes. So far as question of selling it out after getting released is concerned the prescribed authority has stated that in case the property is sold out as alleged by the petitioner he will have a right of re -entry. In these circumstances the prescribed authority arrived at a conclusion that the need of the landlord is bona fide. On the question of comparative hardship the landlord was given benefit of provisions of Explanation (iii) of Section 21 which reads as under: