LUXMI DEVI BAJPAI Vs. KUMAR WOOLLEN MILLS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS writ petition has been filed by the landlady for setting aside the judgment and order dated 14th October, 2004 passed by the learned Additional District Judge, Court No. 5 Kanpur Nagar by which the appeal filed by the tenant under section 22 of the U. P. Urban Buildings (Regulation of letting, Rent and Eviction) Act, 1972 (hereinafter referred to as the 'act') against the order of the Prescribed Authority was allowed and the application filed by the landlady under section 21 (1) (a) of the Act for eviction of the tenant from the shop in dispute was rejected.

(2.) NOTICES were issued to the respondents. In view of the office report dated 11th December, 2006 service of notice of the writ petition on the respondents was found to be sufficient as is clear from the order dated 1st August, 2007 no one has put in appearance on behalf of the respondents and nor has any counsel appeared for the respondents even in the revised list.

(3.) I have heard learned Counsel for the petitioner and have examined the materials available on record.