HOTILAL SHARMAMOR MUKUT SHARMA Vs. SUB DIVISIONAL MAGISTRATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) First writ petition is directed against the order dated 15/11/1991 passed by Rent Control and Eviction Officer/Sub Divisional Magistrate, Mant district Mathura in the case of Anil Kumar Agarwal v. Mor Mukut Sharma and two Ors.. Through the said order house in dispute viz. House No. 90A Govind Nagar Mathura has been declared vacant. However through the said order release application of the landlord under Section 16(1)(b) of the Act was also rejected after recording the finding that Rent Control and Eviction officer was not satisfied that landlord bonafidely required the same. Against order rejecting the release application landlord - Anil Kumar Agarwal filed civil (Rent Control) Revision No. 213 of 1991. District Judge, Mathura through judgment and order dated 21/1/1993 allowed the revision, set aside that part of the order dated 15/11/1991 passed by R.C.& E.O. through which release application had been rejected. District Judge further directed that in case writ petition filed against that part of the impugned order dated 15/1/1991 through which vacancy was declared (i.e. this writ petition No. 33384 of 1991) was dismissed then R.C. & E.O. should re-consider release application. District Judge allowed the revision on 21/1/1993.

(2.) The vacancy was declared on the ground that Mor Mukut respondent No. 5 was the tenant of the accommodation in dispute and he had admittedly constructed a house in the same city. The case of Mor Mukut Sharma was that he was not the tenant of the house in dispute but his father i.e. Hotilal Sharma the petitioner was a tenant. Petitioner also took up the same case and asserted that it was he who was the tenant and not his son Mor Mukut Sharma hence no vacancy occurred due to construction of house by Mor Mukut Sharma, as he was not dependent upon him and he had constructed the house after taking loan from the Bank. The case of the landlord was that Mor Mukut Sharma was tenant since June 1978.

(3.) Initially Shivadhar Misra was the owner landlord of the house in dispute whose father had let out the same. Shivadhar Misra on 25.1.1988 executed an Agreement for sale in favour of respondents 2 to 4 Anil Kumar Agarwal, Girish Kumar Agarwal and Rajendra Kumar Agarwal all sons of Bhikkhilal Agarwal. Shivadhar Misra on the same date i.e. 25.1.1988 executed a power of Attorney in favour of Bhikkhilal Agarwal, i.e. Father of respondents 2 to 4. Acting upon the said power of attorney and on the basis of the said Agreement Sri Bhikkhilal Agarwal executed a registered sale deed in respect of the house in dispute in favour of his sons on 21.1.1989.