VATSALA NAYAR Vs. VANDANA TANDON

JUDGEMENT

(1.) -

(2.) BY means of this writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution, the petitioner has challenged the order passed by the Vth Additional District Judge, Kanpur Nagar, dated 20-5-1987, dismissing the appeal and upholding the order passed by the Prescribed Authority/Civil Judge, Kanpur dated 12-5-1986 in proceedings under section 21 (1) (a) of U. P. Act 13 of 1972.

(3.) THE Prescribed Authority holding that Smt. Vandana Tandon was the landlady entitled to maintain the application and her need for the same was bonafide and genuine, allowed the application against which the petitioner went up in appeal before the Additional District Judge who also on going through the evidence on record and applying his mind to the same recorded a finding that Smt. Vandana Tandon, respondent no. 1, was the landlady entitled to maintain the application and further that the petitioner is not even a tenant but was allowed to continue in possession after the death of her husband, by the I. E. L. who was the tenant to whom the accommodation was let out and hence the petitioner was not entitled to file an objection to the release application and further held that the I. E. L. having filed an application that they have no objection to the release application being allowed, the application of the respondent no. 1 was entitled to be allowed and further recorded a finding that the need of respondent no. 1 for the accommodation was bonafide and genuine and that greater hardship would be caused to the respondent no. 1 if the accommodation was not released in her favour. Feeling aggrieved the petitioner has challenged the same by means of this writ petition.