SARDAR KULDEEP SINGH Vs. RAVINDRA NATH GARG

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS writ petition has been filed by tenant. It arises out of allotment proceedings initiated by Pawan Kumar Singh, respondent No. 2 under Sections 12 and 16 of U.P. Act No. 13 of 1972 in the form of case No. 47 of 2001 on the file of R.C. & E.O./Addl. City Magistrate (II), Kanpur Nagar. Respondent No. 1 Ravindra Nath Garg is landlord. Respondent No. 3 Ram Chandra was another applicant for allotment. The number of property in dispute is 133/131, M -Block, Kidwai Nagar, Kanpur Nagar. R.C. & E.O. by order dated 27 -6 -2002 declared vacancy of the premises in dispute and thereafter by order dated 15 -7 -2002 it was released in favour of landlord respondent No. 1. The release application was registered as Case No. 11 of 2001. Against orders dated 15 -7 - 2002 releasing the premises in dispute in favour of the landlord and order dated 27 -6 -2002 declaring vacancy revision was filed by the tenant/petitioner before District Judge under Section 18 of the Act being Rent Revision No. 34 of 2002 which was dismissed on 23 -10 -2003 hence this writ petition.

(2.) LANDLORD filed counter objections before R.C. and E.O., copy of which is Annexure -3 to the writ petition. In paras 2, 7 and 9 of the said objection it was stated that property in dispute was let out only for commercial purpose i.e. for being used as godown and later on the tenant illegally started residing therein hence it was legally vacant. In para -8 it was stated that tenant was initially residing at 149 -HIG, Ratan Lal Nagar, Kanpur Nagar. R.C. and E.O. in its order declaring vacancy also held that property in dispute was let out for being used as godown and tenant had another residential house at his disposal being 149 - HIG, Ratan Lal Nagar, Kanpur Nagar where he was actually residing and as tenant had recently shifted the godown completely in an other adjoining premises after purchasing the same and started using the building in dispute for residential purpose hence it was deemed vacant. R.C. and E.O. also held that tenant had several other residential accommodations in Kanpur Nagar.

(3.) IT was asserted by the landlord that the tent business in the name and style of Bharat Kiraya Bhandar for which accommodation in dispute was taken on rent had been shifted by the tenant in the adjoining accommodation bearing No. 133/130 and thereafter tenant started using the accommodation in dispute only for residential purpose in addition to his own residential house No. 149 -HIG, Ratan Lal Nagar.