VIJAI SINGH Vs. VIIITH ADDL DISTRICT JUDGE AGRA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) SUDHIR Narain, J. This Writ Peti tion is directed against the order dated 31. 5. 1997 passed by the Additional Dis trict Judge, Agra allowing the appeal filed by the landlord and releasing the disputed accommodation in favour of the landlord-Respondent. The facts, in brief are that the petitioners are the tenants of the disputed accommodation of which Respondent No. 2 is the landlord Respondent No. 2 filed an application for release of the dis puted accommodation on the allegation that it is in dilapidated condition. The p 3titioners contested the application and denied that the shops in question were in dilapidated condition. The Prescribed Authority rejected the application vide his order dated 21. 11. 1994. Respondent No. 2 filed appeal against this order before the District Judge. Respondent No. 1 has al lowed the appeal by the impugned order dated 31. 5. 1997 reversing the finding recorded by the trial Court.

(2.) I have heard learned counsel for the parties. Learned counsel for the petitioners has assailed the finding recorded by the appellate authority that the disputed accommodation is in dilapidated condition. It is admitted to the petitioners that during the pendency of appeal additional evidence was adduced on behalf of landlord and the petitioners were also granted time to submit evidence in rebuttal. Respondent No. 2 had filed, report of the Architect wherein it was indi cated that the accommodation in dispute is in dilapidated condition. This report was also proved by Architect. The petitioners did not file any counter af fidavit. In view of the additional evidence the appellate authority recorded finding that the disputed premises is in dilapidated condition. I do not find any legal infirmity in this finding.