NARESH CHANDRA KHANDELWAL Vs. DEVI PRASAD

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner has sought the quashing of the order dated 14th May, 2001 passed by the Prescribed Authority by which the application filed by the landlord under Section 21(1)(a) of the U.P. Urban Buildings (Regulation of Letting, Rent & Eviction) Act, 1972 (hereinafter referred to as the "Act") for eviction of the tenant from the shop in dispute, as it was bona fide required by the landlord, was allowed. The petitioner has also sought the quashing of the judgment and order dated 10th January, 2008 by which the Appeal filed by the tenant under Section 22 of the Act for setting aside the aforesaid order was dismissed by the learned Additional District Judge, Court No. 1, Kanpur Nagar.

(2.) The landlord had filed the application under Section 21(1)(a) of the Act for eviction of the tenant from the premises on the ground that the shop was bona fide required for establishing the business for his unemployed graduate son who was assisting the landlord in the business. The application was allowed by the Prescribed Authority holding that the shop was bona fide required by the landlord for his son and that the landlord was likely to suffer greater hardship in the event the application was rejected. The finding recorded by the Prescribed Authority has been confirmed by the Appellate Court.

(3.) Learned Counsel for the petitioner submitted that the findings recorded by the Prescribed Authority as well as the Appellate Authority are perverse as the landlord had enough accommodation from where the proposed expansion of the business could be carried out.