- (1.) HEARD counsel for the parties and perused the record.
(2.) AN application under section 16 of the U.P. Act no.XIII of 1972 was filed by the landlord before the Rent Control and Eviction Officer, Shahjahanpur which was registered as case no. 2/3 of 2008 Raseed Ahmad Ansari vs. Hafeez Ahmad. The application was rejected by judgment and order dated 3-3-2008 by the Prescribed Authority. Aggrieved the landlord preferred civil revision no. 16 of 2008 against the judgment and order dated 3-3-2008 before the District Judge, Shahjahanpur who by means of the judgment and order dated 2-5-2008 allowed the same and remanded the matter for fresh adjudication before the trial court. Prescribed authority thereafter hearing the parties on remand of the case allowed the release application vide order dated 29-8-2008 which was challenged by the petitioner in revision before the Addl. District Judge, Shahjahanpur. The revision was dismissed by the revisional court vide judgment and order dated 16-3-2009. Aggrieved by the order of the courts below, the petitioner has preferred the present writ petition with the prayer for quashing of the impugnment judgment and order dated 16-3-2009 passed by the Addl. District Judge Court No.8 Shahjahanpur in civil revision no. 47 of 2008 Hafeez Ahmed vs. Raseed Ahmed Ansari as well as the judgement and order dated 29-8-2008 passed by the Prescribed Authority/ Rent Control and Eviction Officer, Shahjahanpur/Addl. Collector ( Admn.) in case no. 4 of 2008 Raseed Ahmed Ansari vs. Hafeez Ahmed appended as Annexure no. 6 and 4 respectively to the writ petition. The petitioner has further sought a relief of mandamus directing the respondent not to dispossess the petitioner from the accommodation in dispute.
(3.) THE facts in nut and a shell is that the petitioner was tenant in the shop in dispute for about 10-11 years. Its previous landlady was Smt. Nafisa Begum wife of Late Wali Ullah, resident of mohalla Haddak Chauki near School Shiksha Samiti, Shahjahanpur. He claims that the tenancy started in the year 1996-97 on a rent of Rs. 60.00 per month which was enhanced to Rs.100.00 lateron. It is submitted by the counsel for the petitioner that the petitioner is a poor person engaged in business of repairing bicycles in the shop in dispute and when in the month of January, 2006 he demanded receipt of the enhanced rent, it was refused by the previous owner. The petitioner in the circumstances was compelled to send the rent by money order to Smt. Nafisa Begum who did not accept and returned back the money order. Aggrieved by the conduct of the previous owner, the petitioner filed Misc. Case No. 35 of 2006 Hafiz Ahmed vs. Smt. Nafisa Begum before the Civil Court for depositing the rent which was continuously being deposited in the civil court. The house alongwith the shop in dispute was thereafter purchased by the respondent Raseed Ahmad who became the new landlord of the petitioner in the house in dispute. He sent notice on 20-3-2007 and compelled the petitioner to vacate the shop in dispute. Thereafter in the suit for temporary injunction filed by the respondent, injunction was granted by the civil court by order dated 24-5-2007, on application paper no. 6-C filed by the new landlord.;