MOHD. IBRAHIM Vs. ABDUL AZIZ AND 9 OTHERS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Vakalatnama filed today by Sri Virendra Kumar on behalf of the petitioner is taken on record.

(2.) By means of the present writ petition, the petitioner is challenging the findings of fact recorded by both the Courts below on the bona fide need of the landlord and comparative hardship of the parties.

(3.) Learned counsel for the petitioner is not challenging the findings on bona fide need of the landlord rather the assertion is that an alternative accommodation was offered by the landlord during the pendency of the release application in an affidavit filed on 4.7.2013 before the Prescribed Authority. This offer was accepted by the tenant before the lower appellate court in his reply affidavit dated 5.10.2015 but the appellate court below had illegally recorded that the shop no. 483, Mohalla Khatriwara Sikandarabad, Bulandshahr offered to the petitioner is being used as a godown by the applicant landlord. As such it cannot be made available to the petitioner tenant.