M.P.Singh - (1.) ADMITTEDLY, one Smt. Kalawati was the tenant of the premises in dispute. She was married to Jeet Singh, who expired in 1965 ; she died in the year 1987.
(2.) THE landlord-opposite party no. 3 filed an application under section 16 (1) (b) of U. P. Act XIII of 1972 before the Rent Control and Eviction Officer for release of the accommodation on the ground that after the death of the sitting tenant Smt. Kalawati, the accommodation had fallen vacant. Petitioner Dhan Bahadur was in illegal occupation of the same. Vacancy may be declared and after that the said accommodation may be released in his favour. The said application was contested by the petitioner on the ground that after the death of Jeet Singh in the year 1965, Smt. Kalawati remarried the petitioner and since then they had been living as husband and wife. On 4-1-1987 when Smt. Kalawati died, he inherited the tenancy as her heir. A report of Rent Control Inspector was obtained on 13-2-1987. It was stated in the said report that the accommodation was found locked and the petitioner was said to be in unauthorised occupation of the same.
(3.) AFTER receiving the report from the Rent Control Inspector, the Rent Control and Eviction Officer issued notice to the petitioner. He filed his objection stating that Smt. Kalawati was his legally wedded wife. He was a joint tenant alongwith her and after her death he became the tenant of the accommodation. There was no vacancy. The application for release was not maintainable. The Rent Control and Eviction Officer as well as the revisional court held that the petitioner was not the husband of Smt Kalawati. He was in unauthorised occupation of the accommodation, and accordingly the vacancy was declared. Thereafter, on 31-7-1989 an order of release was passed under section 16 (1) (b) in favour of the landlord. The need of the landlord was held to be bonafide.;