NAZEER AHMAD Vs. DISTRICT JUDGE AND ORS.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS is tenant's writ petition arising out of eviction/release proceedings initiated by landlady Smt. Amna Begum, since deceased and survived by respondents 3 to 6 against him on the ground of bona fide need under section 21 of U.P. Act No. 13 of 1972 in the form of P.A. Case 118 of 1979. Prescribed authority/IInd Additional Civil Judge, Moradabad through judgment and order dated 16.1.1991 allowed the release application. Tenant filed an appeal against the said judgment and order under section 22 of the Act being Rent Control Appeal No. 11 of 1991. District Judge, Moradabad through judgment and order dated 17.4.1993 dismissed the appeal hence this writ petition. The landlady in her release application stated that she had at her disposal one big room two kotharies, one store alongwith other amenities like latrine bathroom, kitchen etc. The tenant asserted that landlady had in her possession eleven rooms. During pendency of this writ petition this Court through order dated 4.12.1996 remitted an issue to lower Appellate Court to determine the extent of accommodation available to the landlady after getting the same inspected through Advocate Commissioner. Commissioner was required to submit report twice by the District Judge as in the first report dimensions of the rooms had not been given. No objections against the said report were filed. District Judge, Moradabad by order dated 15.2.1997 found that the size of the rooms given in site -plan 15 -C prepared by Commissioner was correct and held that there were eight rooms in possession of the landlady, and other accommodation as shown in the site plan 15 -C (prepared by the Commissioner). Thereafter, the District Judge remitted the said finding alongwith records to this Court.

(2.) THE accommodation in dispute i.e. in possession of tenant consists of only one room and a tin shed. The tenant was initially residing in the said house. Thereafter in the year, 1973 he was permitted in writing by landlady to use that for commercial purpose also in addition to residential purpose and he installed a Bhatti for carrying on business of polishing utensils. After sometime tenant acquired a residential house and started residing therein and continued to use the accommodation in dispute only for commercial purpose.

(3.) IN my opinion discovery of eight rooms to be in possession of the landlady doubly damaged her case. Firstly the statements in the original release application that landlady had only four rooms in her possession became incorrect. Incorrect statement regarding a vital aspect of the matter renders the release application not bona fide. Secondly, possession of eight rooms by landlords is sufficient to satisfy their need.