KAILASH NATH BAJPAI Vs. CHANDRA SHEKHAR SINGH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) S. P. Srivastava, J. Heard the counsel for the petitioner and Sri K. M. Dayal, Senior Advocate representing the landlord- respondent.

(2.) FEELING aggrieved by an appellate order parsed in tne proceedings under Section 21 of the U. F. Urban Buildings (Regulation of Letting, Rent and Eviction) Act, 1972 (hereinafter ret erred to as the Act) whereunder the appellate authority after setting aside the order of the Prescribed Authority rejecting the application for release of the accommodation in dispute under the tenancy of the petitioner had granted the release sought for, the petitioner-tenant has now approached this Court seeking redress praying for the quashing of the appellate order.

(3.) THE Prescribed Authority came to the conclusion after taking into consideration various documentary evidence on record that a portion of the disputed accommodation was being utilised for residential purposes. However, the Prescribed Authority did not accept the claim of the landlord that the need for the accommodation in dispute was genuine, bonafide and pressing. It may be noticed that during the pendency of the proceedings the landlord had offered an alternative accommodation for being utilised for residential purposes to the petitioner but that offer was not taken in to consideration holding that it was an after-thought and was not bona fide one. It was also observed that the tenant-petitioner was suffering from hypertension and the accommodation which had been offered being situated on the first floor, it may prove harmful to the tenant as he will have to go up stairs. On the aforesaid findings the release application was rejected.