BATA INDIA LTD Vs. V ADDL SESSIONS JUDGE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This is tenant's writ petition arising out of eviction A release proceedings initiated by landlady-respondent No. 3, Shrimati Shanti, Devi Gupta, on the ground of bonafide need under Section 21 of U.P. Act No. 13 of 1972 in the form of P.A. Case No. 49 of 1992 on the file of Prescribed Authority / Civil Judge, Firozabad.

(2.) Property in dispute is a shop dimensions of which are approximately 27 feet (frontage) and 24 feet (depth). During arguments a sketch map of the shop in dispute was filed by learned Counsel for the landlady, substantial correctness of which was not denied by the learned Counsel for the tenant-petitioner. Rent of the shop in dispute is Rs. 574.75 per month.

(3.) In the release application it was stated that landlady was partner in M/S Advance Group of Industries, which is preparing high class quality glass wares, including fancy tumblers, flasks and wine glasses and other related items. It was stated by the landlady that her husband and sons were also partners of the said firm and that the firm had achieved goodwill not only in India but abroad also. It was also stated that the factory of the firm was situated in suburban area, hence she required the shop in dispute for establishing show room as the same being situated in Sadar Bazar, Firozabad was quite suitable for the said purpose. Prescribed Authority through judgment and order dated 9.7.1997 rejected the release application. Against the said judgment and order landlady filed Rent Control Miscellaneous appeal No. 33 of 1997. V A.D.J. Firozabad through judgment and order dated 31.7.2000 allowed the appeal, set aside the judgment and order of the Prescribed Authority and released the shop in dispute in favour of the landlady, hence this writ petition.