LAKSHMI SHANKAR MISHRA Vs. VINEETA RICHHRIYA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri M.D. Mishra for the land lady-respondent.

(2.) The present petition has been filed seeking quashing of the orders dated 15.2016 and 9.3.2017 passed by Prescribed Authority/Judge Small Causes, Jhansi in Case No. 26 of 2014 and Additional District Judge/Special Judge, Jhansi in Rent Control Appeal No. 9 of 2016 respectively.

(3.) A perusal of the record would reveal that the land lady-respondent had filed application under Sec. 21(1) (a) of U.P. Act No. 13 of 1972 against the tenant-petitioner for release of the accommodation in dispute by claiming that she had been residing with her father-in-law, mother-in-law, jethani and children and the accommodation available with her was not sufficient to meet the need of her family which included her husband and children and therefore the accommodation in dispute was purchased by her, vide sale deed dated 27.1.2011, to fulfil her family's residential requirement. The release application was filed on 22.4.2014 i.e. after expiry of three years from the date of purchase by alleging that a notice was given to the tenant-petitioner disclosing that the accommodation in dispute was purchased by her, which she bona fide required for her personal use, and therefore he may vacate the premises.