KHAN CHAND SINGH Vs. PREMAWATI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri Som Narayan Mishra, learned counsel appearing for the respondents.

(2.) Present petition has been filed for quashing the judgment and order dated 27.7.2016 passed by the Prescribed Authority / Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Anoop Shahar, Bulandshahar in Rent Case No. 3 of 2012 (Smt. Premawati vs. Khanchand Singh) as well as impugned judgment and order dated 7.9.2017 passed by Additional District Judge, Anoopshahar, Bulandshahar in Rent Appeal No. 2 of 2016 (Khanchand Singh vs. Smt. Premawati).

(3.) The application filed by the landlady under Section 21(1)(a) of the Act 13 of 1972 was allowed. The appeal filed against the same by the tenant was also dismissed. The issues regarding bonafide need and comparative hardship were also decided against the tenant, which were affirmed in the appeal filed by the tenant. The suit was filed on the ground that the business of her husband is not faring well and her, who son is living separately is also doing his own business separately. One shop released in favour of the landlady has been handed over to grandson Manish for his business and one widow daughter is living with her and it was specifically asserted that the son of the tenant is owner of one school and his wife has one alternative shop on railway road and as such the tenant has alternative shop for shifting. The suit was allowed. The suit was contested by the tenant mainly on the ground that the landlady is an old ailing lady and she does not require the shop for her own purposes. She had several shops and even after the release of the other shops the same were not occupied and the sole object to somehow get the shop vacated and there is no bonafide need. However, it was not disputed by the tenant that the shop no. 295 belongs to his wife Smt. Indrawati, whereon business is also being carried.