- (1.) Heard Counsel for the petitioner and perused the record. However, none appears for the respondents even though case was taken up in the revised list. This petition by the landlord is directed against an appellate order dated 4.9.1999 by which the order of the Prescribed Authority dated 15.7.1998 allowing the release application has been quashed.
(2.) The petitioner-landlady preferred an application under section 21(1)(a) of U.P. Act No. XIII of 1972 inter alia with the allegation that she had purchased the disputed house through a registered sale-deed dated 31.5.1998 wherein one Laxman Singh was the tenant at the rent of Rs. 15/- per month of a shop situated on the ground floor but thereafter he died and the respondents being his heirs became tenants. Her husband was working as Assistant Meter Inspector in the Electricity Department at Shamli who retired on 31.8.1994 and therefore she asked the tenants to vacate the premises as her husband wanted to start an electrical goods business from the disputed shop and on their refusal, she was forced to file the release application setting up the need. It was further stated that she or her husband has no other house or shop from where he can start his business.
(3.) The respondent-tenants contested the application inter alia on the ground that the husband of the petitioner was receiving a handsome pension and one son was employed in O.N.G.C. and therefore, they did not require the premises for business. It was further stated that the premises is a huge building consisting of about 8-9 rooms, out which, 5 rooms are on the ground floor along with 'Baithak' (living room) which could be used for the business of landlady's husband. It is further stated that he is doing business of Goldsmith from the disputed shop since long and therefore, his eviction would cause more hardship to him.;