S MAJUMDAR Vs. A D J MEERUT

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS is tenant's writ petition arising out of eviction/release proceedings initiated by Kanti Prasad Maheshwari, landlord respondent No. 2, on the ground of bona fide need under Section 21 of U.P. Act No. 13 of 1972. Release application was registered as P.A. Case No. 13 of 1979 and was filed by Kanti Prasad, respondent No. 2 landlord against S. Majumdar, original tenant -petitioner, since deceased and survived by L.Rs. Accommodation in dispute is a house. Landlord stated that his family and the families of his three brothers consisted of 22 members, including seven married couples and they had only ten rooms at their disposal in their ancestral house hence he required additional separate accommodation.

(2.) PRESCRIBED authority held that ten rooms were sufficient for 22 or 23 members, hence need was not bona fide. Question of comparative hardship was also decided in favour of the tenant. Release application was accordingly rejected on 9.11.1979 by the Prescribed Authority/Munsif Hawaii, Meerut. Against the said judgment and order landlord respondent No. 2 filed R.C. Appeal No. 510 of 1973. IIIrd A.D.J., Meerut, through judgment and order dated 18.7.1986 allowed the appeal, set aside the judgment and order passed by the prescribed authority and allowed the release application of the landlord respondent No. 2. This writ petition filed by the tenant is directed against the aforesaid judgment and order passed by the appellate court.

(3.) ON the ground floor of the accommodation in dispute landlord is running business. Hence it would be more convenient for the landlord to reside on the first floor. In the ancestral house of the landlord he has got l/4th share. The said house consists of 10 rooms. 22 persons, i.e., landlord and his brothers and their families are residing therein. Lower appellate court also found that according to the Commissioner's report in the ancestral house of the landlord there was no sitting or drawing room or study room. Concept of joint family particularly when head of the family is no more is gradually loosening in India. Four brothers, along with their families, residing in one ancestral house, when their father is no more, is no more a common phenomenon in India. In view of this it cannot be said that need of the landlord was not bona fide. House in dispute, which is first floor accommodation, consists of six rooms, rent of which is only Rs. 62.50.