M.P.Singh - (1.) DOES the U. P. Act no. 13 of 1972 completely overlook the interest of the landlords ? No. This Act is a piece of social legislation aimed at easing the problems of tenants, protecting them from eviction by the greedy landlords, but at the same time it also protects the interest of the landlords for getting the accommodation released, of course, on proof of bona fide need and greater hardship.
(2.) THE petitioners are the tenants of a shop situated at Bag Muzaffar kha, Agra. Opposite party no. 3, Jagdish Prasad Agarwal purchased bungalow no. 9/26, Bag Muzaffarkha in the year 1959 from one Loomba. The shop in dispute is situate just adjacent to the main gate of the bungalow and is a part of the said building. It is in the form of a garrage. The main building is being used for residential purposes by the landlord. The said shop was taken on rent by one Chaturbhuj Jain from the erstwhile owner in the year 1954. He died leaving behind Shreepal Jain, his only son.
(3.) OPPOSITE party no. 3 filed an application for release under Section 21 (1) (a) of U. P. Act. no. 13 of 1972 (herein-after referred to as the Act) against Shreepal Jain in the year 1979. Shreepal Jain died on 11-1-1983. The petitioners were substituted as his heirs. Petitioner no 1 is his widow while petitioner nos. 2 and 3 are his sons. 7 The case set up by the landlord in his release application (case no. 1 of 1979) was that he had four sons; 1. Shiv Narain Agarwal, a practising Advocate, 2. Umakant Agrawal, practising Advocate on taxation side, 3. Virendra Agrawal, charted accountant and 4. Surendra Agrawal, who was also highly qualified. He has a degree of M.B.A. from Ahmedabad. He wanted to start his engineering industry at Agra.;