ANAND PRAKASH Vs. VI ADDL DISTRICT JUDGE SAHARANPUR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) SUDHIR Narain, J. This writ peti tion is directed against the order of the Prescribed Authority dated 6-3-1990 releasing the disputed accommodation in favour of the landlord-respondents and the order of the appellate authority-respondent No. 1 dated 16-4-1993 affirm ing the said order in appeal.

(2.) THE facts, in brief, are that the petitioner is a tenant of shop No. 13/708 Bahalkhana situate on the ground floor of the building situate in Bazar Meergani, Kabari Bazar, Saharanpur. THE landlord- respondents filed application under Sec tion 21 (l) (a) of U. P. Urban Buildings (Regulation of Letting, Rent and Evic tion) Act, 1972 (In short the Act) on the allegation that the disputed accommoda tion is required for running a clinic by Dr. Praveen Kumar son of Hem Chandra, one of the landlords. THE first and second floor of the building was got vacated by one Shyam Lal but it is in dilapidated condi tion and requires repairs etc. THE first and second floor will be used for residential, purpose and the accommodation in ques tion which is situate on the ground floor shall be used for clinic purpose by Dr. Praveen Kuftiar. THE petitioner, who was impleaded as opposite party No. 2 in the plaint, filed objection to the said applica tion. It was stated that Dr. Praveen Kumar does not require the accommodation in question for opening his clinic on the dis puted premises. THE Prescribed Authority allowed the application on 6-3-1990 on the finding that the disputed accommodation is required for Praveen Kumar Mittal for opening his clinic. THE petitioner filed an appeal against the said order. THE appeal was dismissed on 16-4- 1993. THE petitioner has filed the present writ peti tion against these orders.

(3.) THE second submission of learned counsel for the petitioner is that Hem Chand, father of Praveen Kumar, has con structed a residential house at Ahmad Bagh and there Praveen Kumar can start/establish his clinic. In the writ peti tion the details of the accommodation at Ahmad Bagh have not been given. It is, however, clear that Hem Chand was ear lier residing in a different house situate at Chatta Jambu Das, Roop Niwas, Saharan pur. If he had constructed his house for residential purpose, this does not suggest that the need of Praveen Kumar Mittal to reside independently and have his clinic has been satisfied. Father of Praveen Kumar has constructed his own house for residential purpose but that does not sug gest that Praveen Kumar will not have his clinic in the disputed premises and also reside on the upper storey of the premises where the disputed shop is existing. Praveen Kumar is to reside on the first and second floors of the house and on the ground floor in the disputed shop he will have his clinic.