ABDUL SHAMAD Vs. JAMEEL AHMAD AND 6 OTHERS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard Sri Hemant Kumar, learned counsel for the petitioner/defendant/tenant and Sri H.N. Singh, learned Senior Advocate assisted by Sri Maqsood Ahmad Beg, learned counsel for the respondents/landlords/plaintiffs.

(2.) This is tenant's writ petition, seeking relief that the order dated 07.08.2007 passed by the Prescribed Authority in P.A. Case No. 8 of 2004 directing for release of the disputed shop and the order dated 04.07.2017 in P.A. Appeal No. 2 of 2007 passed by the court of Additional District Judge, Court No. 2, Jaunpur dismissing the appeal of the petitioner/defendant/tenant, be quashed.

(3.) Briefly stated facts of the present case are that the respondents/plaintiffs inherited the disputed premises and thus are the owner and landlord of the disputed premises which was let out by their father to the petitioner/defendant/tenant on 01.02.1996. A release application under Section 21(1) (a) of the U.P. Urban Buildings (Regulation of Letting, Rent and Eviction), Act, 1972 (U.P. Act No. 13 of 1972), was filed by the respondents/landlords/plaintiffs on 03.07.2004 alleging that respondents/plaintiffs nos. 3, 4, 5 and 6 have become major and are unemployed and for the purpose of carrying on business, they need the tenanted premises. The aforesaid case was registered as P.A. Case No. 8 of 2004 which was allowed by the impugned judgment dated 07.08.2007 passed by the Civil Judge (Sr. Div.), Jaunpur and the tenanted premises was released on the ground of bona fide need of the respondents/plaintiffs nos. 3 to 6. Aggrieved with this order, the petitioner/defendant/tenant filed P.A. Appeal No. 2 of 2007 which has been dismissed by the impugned judgment dated 04.07.2017 passed by the court of Additional District Judge, Court No. 2, Jaunpur. Aggrieved with these two judgments, the petitioner/defendant/tenant has filed the present writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India.