BHAGWATI PRASAD AGRAWAL Vs. RAMA SHANKER AND OTHERS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS is landlord's petition directed against the concurrent orders passed by two authorities rejecting his application filed under sections 21(1)(a) and (b) of U.P. Act XIII of 1972 (for short 'the Act') for release of the disputed accommodation.

(2.) I have heard Sri Arvind Srivastava, learned Counsel for the petitioner and Sri Prakash Gupta, learned Counsel for the respondent -tenant. Learned Counsel for the parties have advanced arguments in respect of release application under section 21(1)(a) as well as 21(1)(b). However, I propose to take up the case set up under section 21(1)(a) of the Act first.

(3.) IN reply it has been contended by the learned Counsel for the respondent -tenant that both the Courts below have recorded a concurrent finding on the question of bona fide need and comparative hardship and the said findings being finding of fact are not open to interference by this Court in writ jurisdiction. It has further been urged that the petitioner -landlord if was in need of any additional accommodation he could easily construct the same on the top floor of his existing residential house or on the vacant land lying adjacent to his residential house.