RATAN LAL Vs. IIND ADDL. DISTRICT JUDGE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS writ petition is directed against the order dated 20.2.1997 passed by respondent No. 1 allowing the appeal against the order of the Prescribed Authority and releasing the disputed shop under Section 21(1)(a) of U.P. Urban Buildings (Regulation of Letting, Rent and Eviction) Act, 1972 (in short referred to as the Act). Respondent No. 3 filed an application under Section 21(1)(a) of the Act for release of shop No. 142, Sarrafa Bazar, Jhansi on the allegation that respondent No. 3 was landlord of the shop and the petitioners were its tenants. The shop in question was required for landlord's son Vinod. He wants to carry on business of general merchandise in case the shop in question is vacated.

(2.) THE application was contested by the petitioners. It was asserted that Vinod son of landlord was less than 18 years and studying and assisting his father in shop.

(3.) THE learned Counsel for the petitioner has contended that the landlord recently purchased a big house in October, 1996 in the name of his wife. It is urged that in a portion of residential house one Nathu Ram had shop of black smith but later on he vacated. The appellate authority considered this aspect of the matter. It is admitted that it is a residential accommodation. It was not established that previous owner Nathu Ram was carrying on work of black -smith. Admittedly it is residential accommodation. Nathu Ram was alleged to be residing in this house and carrying on business. The landlord cannot be compelled to carry on business in residential accommodation.