LAWS(ALL)-1996-1-141

SHAHID PARVEZ Vs. THE XI ADDL. DISTRICT JUDGE

Decided On January 08, 1996
SHAHID PARVEZ Appellant
V/S
The Xi Addl. District Judge Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS writ petition is directed against the order dated 21.10.1995 passed by respondent No. 1 allowing the appeal filed by respondent No. 2 against the order of Prescribed Authority and releasing the disputed accommodation in favour of respondent No. 2. The facts in brief are that the petitioner is a tenant of shop No. 39/42 situated at Mohalla Maida Bazar, Meston Road, Kanpur Nagar Respondent No. 2 filed an application for release of the said shop on the allegation that her family consists of 11 members and she required the shop for the purpose of carrying on business by her family members.

(2.) THE application was contested by the petitioner. It was stated that respondent No. 2 has sufficient source of income. The Prescribed Authority rejected the application on the finding that the need of respondent No. 2 was not bona fide. It relied upon the fact that one room alleged to be vacant on the ground floor was not got inspected through the Commissioner Respondent No. 2 filed an appeal and the appellate authority, reversed the judgment and allowed the appeal and released the shop in dispute in favour of respondent No. 2. This order has been challenged in the present writ petition.

(3.) I have perused the affidavit filed by the petitioner before the appellate authority as well as the counter -affidavit filed by the respondent on this question. Smt Durgi Devi, respondent No. 2 filed an affidavit dated 22nd April 1995 and in para 5 of the affidavit it was stated that one store comprising one room shown by letter B and a Kothari shown by letter C was in the tenancy of Mohammad Ahmad alias Raja Bundewala which has its access from the north conservatory lane and one small latrine shown by letter D which is lying broken also towards the side of conservatory lane. It was denied that there was any other accommodation which was vacant and available to the landlady. The petitioner did not file any affidavit of Mohammad Ahmad alias Rajabhai Bundewala regarding the said accommodation. He was admittedly a tenant.