CHAND AUSHDHALAYA Vs. ADDL DISTRICT JUDGE KANPUR NAGAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) -THE tenant has filed this petition for setting aside the order dated 4th May, 1989 by which the Prescribed Authority allowed the application filed by the landlord under section 21 (1) (a) of the U. P. Urban Buildings (Regulation of Letting, Rent and Eviction) Act, 1972 (hereinafter referred to as the "act') for eviction of the tenant from the accommodation in dispute as it was bona fide required by the landlord. The petitioner has also sought the quashing of the judgment and order dated 16th July, 2002 by which the Appeal filed by the tenant under section 22 of the Act was dismissed.

(2.) THE application under section 21 (1) (a) of the Act had been filed by four applicants Smt. Parbati, Smt. Laxmi Devi, Smt. Surja Devi and Smt. Basanti Devi. It was stated that the applicants jointly purchased the disputed house in the year 1958 with a view to reconstruct the same so that they may have sufficient accommodation for their family members; that because of the differences between the applicants, Smt. Laxmi Devi filed Original Suit No. 100 of 1966 for partition of her 1/4th share in the disputed house and ultimately the suit was decided on 28th May, 1975 on the basis of a compromise entered into between the parties wherein the share of each applicant was demarcated; that the applicants desire to reconstruct the portions falling in their respective share but it was not possible to do so unless the tenant vacated the building; that the tenanted premises consists of about 10 rooms, veranda, store and kitchen and was let out on monthly rent of Rs. 134. 14 per month; that the tenant owns premises No. 127/128 wherein he can shift his business and can also obtain any other accommodation.

(3.) THE tenant filed a detailed reply to the aforesaid application mentioning therein that the applicants did not bona fide require the accommodation in dispute; that in fact the applicants had sufficient alternative accommodation; that the major portion of the building was used for manufacturing of Ayurvedic medicines and that the tenant would suffer greater hardship in case the release application was allowed.