- (1.) Heard Sri Vikram Bhalla, Counsel for the petitioner, Sri Satish Mandhyan appearing for caveator respondent and perused the record. Babu Lal, landlord of the house in dispute, filed rent Petition No. 12 of 1990. Babu Lal v. Ram Sakat, for release of the accommodation under section 21(1)(a) of U.P. Act No. 13 of 1972 (hereinafter referred to as the Act). After his death, he is being represented by his sons-respondent Nos. 1, 2 and 3 in this petition and Ram Sakat who is also no more, is being represented by his widow Petitioner No. 1 sons and daughter-Petitioner Nos. 2 to 5.
(2.) The tenanted accommodation consisting of two khaprail shedded rooms, courtyard and Chabutra on ground floor in premises No. 130/48, Bagahi, Kanpur, was sought to be released by the landlord on the ground that it is required for his personal need and need of his sons and grand children.
(3.) The aforesaid release application was contested by the tenant petitioner on the ground that disputed portion under the tenancy of the opposite party was neither required by the landlord nor there is any element of bonafide need as there are a number of other properties of the landlord from which his need can be satisfied. The premises said to be in possession of the landlord are (i) Premises Nos. 130/48, Bagahi, Kanpur, (ii) Premises No. 130/47, Bagahi, Kanpur and (iii) Premises No. 64/95, Gadaria Mohal, Kanpur.;