ASHFAQ ALI Vs. RAUNAK ALI AND OTHERS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Property in dispute is a house, rent of which is Rs. 5/-per month, hence tenant is adopting all sort of tacticses to delay the disposal of release application filed by landlords respondents No. 1 to 6 against him in the form of P.A. Case No. 4 of 2005. The tenant Mubarak Khan, respondent No. 7 in this writ petition has now put forwarded the petitioner Ashfaq Ali. Petitioner filed impleadment application in the release application claiming that he was co-landlord. The application was rejected by Prescribed Authority/J.S.C.C., Jhansi on 30.5.2007. The said order has been challenged through this writ petition. Annexure-9 to the writ petition is a miscellaneous application under Sec. 28 of the U.P. Urban Buildings (Regulation of Letting, Rent and Eviction) Act, 1972 filed by tenant for repairs etc. In the said application, petitioner was impleaded as one of the landlords.

(2.) The argument of learned Counsel for the petitioner is that by virtue of Rule 15(2), of the Rules framed under U.P. Urban Buildings (Regulation of Letting, Rent & Eviction) Act, 1972 every landlord must sign the release application. In the Full Bench authority of this Court of Gopal Das Vs. A.D.J., 1987 (1) ARC 281 (FB) , it has been held that the said requirement is not valid and release application may be filed even by one or some of the co-landlords. Moreover, the Supreme Court in AIR 2004 SC 1321 : 2004 SCFBRC 77; 2004 (3) Suppl. ARC 71 "India Umbrella Manufacturing Co., M/s Vs. Bhagabandei Agarwalla" and AIR 2006 SC 1471 : 2006 SCFBRC 277 ; 2006 (2) ARC 64 "Mohinder Prasad Jain Vs. Manohar Lal Jain" has held that even one of the landlords can file eviction proceedings against tenant and he need not show the consent of the other landlords.

(3.) Accordingly, if it is assumed that petitioner is co-landlord, it is not necessary to implead him.