SATYA NARAIN TULSIYAN Vs. SHOBHIT KAPOOR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard Sri Atul Dayal learned counsel for the petitioner/appellant/defendant and Sri Saurabh Srivastava, learned counsel for respondent/plaintiff/landlord.

(2.) This writ petition has been filed praying to quash the order dated 19.09.2015 in Rent Case No. 03 of 2013 (Shobhit Kapoor v. Satya Narain Tulsiyan) under Section 21(1)(A) of the U.P. Act No. 13 of 1972 passed by the Prescribed Authority/Addl. Civil Judge (Senior Division), Court No. 3, Kanpur Nagar with respect to tenanted premises at 3rd Floor of House No. 25/38, Karachikhana, Kanpur Nagar and the appellate order dated 27.04.2017 in Rent Appeal No. 78 of 2015 (Satya Narain Tulsiyan v. Shobhit Kapoor) passed by the Additional District Judge, Court No. 24, Kanpur Nagar whereby the appeal of the petitioner/defendant/tenant has been dismissed.

(3.) Briefly stated facts of the present case are that the respondent/plaintiff is the owner/landlord of House No. 25/38, Karachikhana, Kanpur Nagar. The petitioner/appellant/defendant was the tenant of the accommodation of the 3rd floor of the said house. The respondent/plaintiff has obtained B. Tech. Degree in Metalogy from IIT, Kanpur and is in service in T.C.S. Company, Lucknow. According to the respondent/plaintiff there is some serious differences between him and his parents and therefore, before marriage he wants a separate accommodation so that after marriage he may live peacefully in a separate accommodation with his wife. The age of the plaintiff/ respondent has been noted in the appellate order to be 35 years which is marriageable age. The son of the petitioner/ appellant/ defendant has purchased a big residential house being House No. 117/K/13(E)-5, Moti Vihar, Sarvodaya Nagar, Kanpur Nagar by registered sale deed dated 27.08.2011. He has shifted with his family including his son in the newly purchased house and has also applied for disconnection of his electricity connection of the tenanted premises. On the ground of personal need, the respondent/ plaintiff filed a Rent Control Appeal No. 03 of 2013 before the Prescribed Authority/ Addl. Civil Judge (Senior Division), Court No. 3, Kanpur Nagar under Section 21(1)(A) of the U.P. Act No. 13 of 1972 with respect to the tenanted premises in question. Evidences were led by the parties before the Prescribed Authority. An important documentary evidence being Paper No. 21 was filed by the respondent/ plaintiff which is a certified copy of an affidavit filed by the petitioner/ appellant/ defendant. This affidavit was submitted by the petitioner/ appellant/ defendant in the Electricity Department for disconnection of his electricity connection of the disputed premises. In this affidavit, the petitioner/ appellant/ defendant has stated that he along with his son were residing in the tenanted house in question but now his son has purchased House No. 117/K/13(E)-5, Moti Vihar, Sarvodaya Nagar, Kanpur Nagar and as such he has shifted and the tenanted house in question has been locked and therefore, his electricity connection may be disconnected. This evidence remained un-rebutted. No evidence was led by the petitioner/ appellant/ defendant to disprove it or to dispute the correctness of the contents of this affidavit.