- (1.) These two petitions can be disposed of by a common judgment as they arise out of the same case. Petition No. 2600 of 1979 has been filed by the landlord while the petition No. 2992 of 1979 is by the tenants of the accommodation in dispute.
(2.) These are the relevant facts: The Petitioner is the owner and landlord of a residential accommodation which is on the ground floor of a house No. 107/38 Chandra Nagar, Kanpur of which the Respondent No. 3 Inder Singh is a tenant. The landlord has one room, a Kothari and some other accommodations on the first floor of the building which are in occupation of the landlord. The landlord filed an application under Section 21(i)(a) of the U.P. Act No. XIII of 1972 for the eviction of Inder Singh, the tenant on the ground floor on the assertion that his children were experiencing difficulty and inconvenience in the accommodation which is on the first floor of the building. The accommodation at present available with the landlord is entirely insufficient for his needs. He therefore bonafide requires the accommodation in dispute. The application was contested by Inder Singh who asserted that he has a large family consisting of seven members. He has no other alternative accommodation. He would be "thrown on the streets if evicted from the accommodation in dispute and would thereby suffer much greater hardship than the landlord. The Prescribed Authority allowed the application of the landlord. Thereupon, the tenant filed an appeal which has been partly allowed by the learned District Judge. The learned District Judge modified the order passed by the Prescribed Authority to the extent that he directed that the accommodation on the ground floor would be released in favour of the landlord upon his making available the accommodation on the first floor on the aforesaid building to the tenant.
(3.) Aggrieved by the aforesaid order, both the landlord and the tenant have filed these petitions.;