SHEEL WADHWA Vs. IVTH ADDITIONAL DISTRICT JUDGE, MEERUT

JUDGEMENT

(1.) AN application under Section 21 of the U.P. Act 13 of the 1972 was filed by the respondents against Dr. Madan, who was the tenant of the premises in dispute. The application was contested by Dr. Madan. It was rejected. Against that order an appeal was filed by the landlords-respondents. During the pendency of the appeal Dr. Madan, tried to come into picture asserting that the shop was required by her son to set up a business. The application was considered by the Appellate Court and decided in favour of the landlords, as a result of which the application of the respondents-landlords filed under Section 21 of the aforesaid Act was allowed. Even the prescribed Authority had found the need of the landlords to be bonafide. But since he was of the opinion that Dr. Madan, the tenant, was likely to suffer greater hardship, he rejected the application. But, after the death of Dr. Madan the position changed. There was nobody with him, the need of the landlords was to be compared.

(2.) SO far as Shrimati Sheel Wadhwa is concerned, she is a married woman living with her husband and her need could not be taken into account for purposes of rejecting the application under Section 21 of the aforesaid Act.