RADHEY SHYAM SINGH Vs. ANIL KUMAR BHASEEN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard Sri Atul Dayal, learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri H.N. Singh, learned senior counsel assisted by Sri D.P. Singh for the respondent.

(2.) The instant writ petition is directed against the order and judgment dated 16.8.2018 passed by the Prescribed Authority, Kanpur Nagar in Rent Case No. 102/2016 and judgment and order dated 14.11.2018 passed by District Judge, Kanpur Nagar in Rent Appeal No. 41/2018.

(3.) The brief facts giving rise to the instant writ petition are that a release application was filed by the respondent (for short 'the landlord) under Sec. 21(1)(a) of U.P. Act No. 13 of 1972 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act') against the petitioner (for short 'the tenant') in respect of premises 117/H-2/18, Pandu Nagar, Kanpur Nagar. The accommodation in possession of the tenant comprises of two bedrooms, drawing rooms and other amenities on the ground floor of the said building. The first floor and the mezzanine floor of the building are in possession of the landlord. According to the landlord, his family comprises of himself, his wife, son Ankit Bhasin aged 34 years, Mrs. Alisha Bhasin, daughter-in-law, aged 26 years and granddaughter Baby Shivaka Bhasin, aged 4 years. The landlord alleged that he had only one bedroom, one store room, drawing room, one small lobby, one verandah, one latrine/bathroom and one dochhati between ground and first floor in his possession. His son Ankit Bhasin, being married, requires additional accommodation. It was alleged that the landlord also has one daughter Smt. Ruchi Bhatia, who is residing at Kanpur and she has two daughters namely Khushi Bhatia and Krish Bhatia, who often come and stay with the landlord. The landlord was facing acute paucity of accommodation. It was alleged that he along with his family require one bedroom, one guest room for his married daughter and visitors, drawing room, store room, kitchen and other facilities. Similarly, his son requires one bed room, one drawing room and one separate room for his daughter apart from study room and other amenities. It was alleged that the need for additional accommodation could only be fulfilled if the premises in the tenancy of the petitioner on the ground floor is released in his favour.