ROMESH CHANDRA Vs. IIND ADDL DISTRICT JUDGE GHAZIABAD

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Instant petition. under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, arises out of the proceedings under Section 21 (1) (a) of the U. P. Urban Buildings (Regulation of Letting. Rent and Eviction) Act, 1972, (hereinafter referred to as the Act), and is directed against the order passed by IInd Addl. District Judge, Ghaziabad. dated 20-12-90 acting as appel late authority under Section 22 of the Act, allowing the appeal of the tenant-respon dent No. 3 and dismissing the release ap plication.

(2.) FACTS of the case, in brief, are that the petitioner-Landlord applied for the release of the shop in question which is situated on the ground floor in House No. 106. Mohalla-Kanzimal, Ghaziabad, which was oc cupied by Dr. Har Prasad, the respondent No. 3 as tenant.

(3.) THE release application filed by the petitioner was objected to and opposed by the tenant-respondent No. 2 who pleaded that in the same building i. e. house No. 106 one room, on the ground floor situated on the back side, was lying vacant which was being used as godown by the petitioner. The proposed business could be established in the said room by Satish Kumar. The Shop which was in occupation of the landlord could also be partitioned and a portion of which could be given to Satish Kumar. Satish Kumar also owned a house in Nehru Nagar and a portion of the same was being used for carrying on the business of Cement and Biscuit Agencies by Satish Kumar. The need, set up by Landlord was, therefore, neither genuine nor bona fide and in the event the application was allowed, respon dent No. 3 will suffer comparatively greater hardship.