JAYANTI DEVI Vs. DISTRICT JUDGE MORADABAD

JUDGEMENT

(1.) SMT . Jayanti Devi, Petitioner, is a tenant in an accommodation of which the second Respondent Har Pyari Devi is the landlord, within the meaning of that term in U.P. Act 13 of 1972. On March 12, 1976, an application was made under Section 21(1)(a) of the Act by her for release of the portion in the tenancy of the Petitioner. It was founded on the basis that the accommodation in the possession of the landlady was inadequate for her needs and having regard to the number of members in her family, further accommodation was needed by her. She prayed that the accommodation in the possession of the Petitioner be released in her favour. The Petitioner resisted the claim by pleading, principally, that the accommodation in possession of the landlady was sufficient and that her need was not bona fide.

(2.) THE case set up by the landlady was that apart from herself, after the death of her husband, her son Arjun Kumar who was married with one Suneeta and an unmarried daughter Km. Kamlesh, were living with her. The Petitioner set up the case that it was only the landlady and her unmarried daughter who were residing at Moradabad and that Arjun Kumar was living at Bareilly and carrying on business there.

(3.) IN appeal, the learned District Judge appreciated the evidence afresh and came to the conclusion that number of persons living at Moradabad was four as pleaded by the landlady. He also concluded that the accommodation at the disposal of the landlady was not sufficient for the newly married son Arjun Kumar. Reversing the conclusion of the Prescribed Authority, the learned District Judge allowed the application for release and granted a month's time to the tenant to vacate the accommodation.