D.P. TRIPATHI Vs. SURESH KUMAR AND ANOTHER

JUDGEMENT

(1.) - This petition has been filed for setting aside the orders dated 11th July 2007 and 29th Sept. 2007 by which the vacancy of the premises in dispute was declared and the premises were released in favour of the landlord respectively. The petitioner has also sought the quashing of the Judgment and order dated 29th March 2008 by which the Revision filed for setting aside the aforesaid orders was dismissed.

(2.) An application under Sec. 16(1)(a) of the U.P. Urban Buildings (Regulation of Letting, Rent and Eviction) Act, 1972 (hereinafter referred to as the Act) was moved by one Sri Suresh Kumar respondent No.1 in this petition for allotment of the shop in dispute on the ground that it was vacant as the petitioner was an unauthorized occupant since there was no allotment order in his favour. The Rent Control and Eviction Officer by the order dated 11th July 2007 declared vacancy and subsequently, the landlord moved an application for release of the shop in dispute under Sec. 16(1)(b) of the Act. This application was allowed by the order dated 29th Sept. 2007. Feeling aggrieved, the petitioner field Revision under Sec. 18 of the Act for setting aside the aforesaid two orders. The Revision was dismissed.

(3.) I have heard Sri Ambarish Mishra learned Counsel appearing for the petitioner and Sri Prateek Sinha learned Counsel for the respondent No.2 landlord.