SHASHI BHUSHAN ANAND @ TONI Vs. RAM DEVI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard Sri B.N. Agrawal, learned counsel for the petitioners and Sri Chaudhary Subhas Kumar, learned counsel for the respondents.

(2.) The first respondent/landlord through legal heirs applied for release of the house in dispute under Section 21(1)(a) of the U.P. Act No. 13 of 1972 which was registered as P.A. Case No. 13 of 2001 in the court of Civil Judge (Junior Division), Orai. The release application was allowed on 10.05.2006. The petitioner/tenant filed an appeal being Rent Appeal No. 3 of 2006 under Section 22 of the Act which was dismissed on 11.05.2007. Aggrieved, the petitioner applied for recall of the judgment and order on the ground that in absence of the counsel, the appeal could not have been decided on merit. The recall application was rejected on 22.01.2008. Aggrieved, the petitioner had approached this Court in writ jurisdiction by filing Writ Petition No. 21265 of 2008 which was allowed by order dated 05.08.2014. Pursuant thereof, the appellate court has decided and rejected the appeal by order dated 10.10.2014. The petitioner is assailing the order of release and the appellate court order.

(3.) The dispute relates to House No. 103 (new number 130) situated at Mohalla Chandra Nagar, Town Orai, District Jalaun, in which the petitioner/tenant has four rooms. An application was moved under Section 21(1)(a) of the Act for release the premises in dispute in favour of the respondent/landlord who setup her bonafide need alleging that there are 22 members in her family, out of which, 16 members are adult, the accommodation in possession is not sufficient. The house in dispute is in the tenancy of the petitioner/tenant for the past four decades and since then the family has enlarged, hence, the accommodation in her possession being not sufficient to meet the needs of the enlarged family.