UGRA SEN Vs. DISTRICT JUDGE SAHARANPUR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This petition under Article 226 of the Constitution has been filed by the petitioners for quashing the order dated 4.12.1980.

(2.) The case was taken up in the revised list. Sri S. K. Garg, learned counsel for the petitioners was present but no body has appeared on behalf of the respondents. On 2.4.1999 learned counsel for the parties made a request to list this case on 19.4.1999 so that they may seek instructions from their clients and they were heard for some time and the matter was put up today, i.e., 19.4.1999, as part heard. When the learned counsel for the respondent did not turn up. the matter was heard ex parte.

(3.) The brief facts as stated by the petitioners in the petition are that the respondent No. 3 filed an application under Section 16 (1) (b) of Act No. 13 of 1972 read with Section 12 (1) (b) of the Act. It was alleged in the application that the petitioners were tenant of the shop in dispute and were carrying on business in the name of Natho Mal Dharam Das. It was alleged that the two rooms were given to them on the first floor of the shop which were sub-let to one Gyan Chand and other two rooms were also sub-let to Baboo, Bansi. Rudha, Chajju and Gokul. Therefore, there was vacancy under Section 12 (1) (b) of the Act and the landlord wanted to settle his own son in the business, therefore, a prayer was made to release the building under Section 16 (1) of the Act. It was further alleged in the application that the respondent wants to raise construction.