PRAMOD KUMAR GOYAL Vs. SAROJ SHARMA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard Sri Nawal Kishore Mishra, learned counsel for the petitioners and Sri Rishabh Agrawal, learned counsel appearing for the landlord-respondent.

(2.) This petition filed under Article 227 of the Constitution of India raises challenge to the order passed by the Prescribed Authority directing for release of the demised premises in favour of the landlord-respondent and also the order passed in appeal affirming the order passed by the said authority. Admittedly, release application has been filed to set up a plea for need of the son of the landlord-respondent which came to be contested basically on the point that there was no bona fide need so as to warrant release of the premises.

(3.) The Prescribed Authority has ordered for release of the demised premises and, therefore, the landlord-respondent challenged the judgment in appeal taking an additional ground that the release application itself was not maintainable as the mandatory requirement of 6 months' notice to maintain a release application as contemplated under Sec. 21(1)(a) was not fulfilled and, therefore, release application was hit by the first proviso to Sec. 21(1) of Act No.13 of 1972.