RAMA SHANKAR DIXIT Vs. S C TEWARI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS writ petition is directed against the order dated 1-2-90, passed by respondent no. 1, declaring the disputed premises as vacant.

(2.) THE petitioner is a tenant of two rooms, stare, varandah, court yard and latrine in premises no. 133, 175, Transport Nagar, Kanpnr of which respondent no, 2 is the Landlady. Respondent no 2 filed an application for release of the disputed accommodation for her personal need on the ground that she required it for the need of her family members. It was alleged that the tenant had purchased house no. 133/S-1, Rathupurwa Kanpur in the name of his wife from one Shiv Devi and he had shifted in the said house. Notice was issued to the petitioner on the application filed by respondent no. 2. He filed objection to the said application and it was denied that he had actually vacated the disputed accommodation. THE accommodation was used for residential purpose and for the purpose of storing the goods for using and utilising the shop and for loading and unloading of the goods of the customers required to be transported from one place to another.

(3.) LEARNED counsel for the petitioner submitted that the accommodation in question was being used for non-residential-purpose and, therefore, it cannot be deemed as vacant under the provisions of section 12 (3) of U. P. Urban Buildings (Regulation of Letting, Rent and Eviction) Act 1972 (hereinafter referred to as the Act). Sub-section (3) of section 12 of the Act provides that in case of residential building if the tenant or any member of his family purchases or otherwise acquires in a vacant state or gets vacated a residential building in the same city in which the building under tenancy is situate, he shall be deemed to have ceased to occupy the building under his tenancy. Admittedly, the house has been purchased in the name of wife of the petitioner in the year 1987 and the petitioner is residing in the said house with his family.