Rakesh Tiwari, J. - (1.) HEARD counsel for the parties and perused the record.
(2.) THIS petition has been filed challenging the validity and correctness of judgment dated 8.5.2009 and decree dated 11.5.2009 passed by the Prescribed Authority/Civil Judge (S.D.), Rampur in P.A. Case No. 9 of 2006, Ashok Kumar Mehrotra and others v. Rajesh Kumar Malhotra as well as judgment dated 23.4.2010 and decree dated 29.4.2010 passed by Additional District Judge, Court No. 2, Rampur in Rent Appeal No. 4 of 2009. The petitioner has prayed for a writ of certiorari quashing the aforesaid judgment and decrees and has also prayed for a writ of mandamus commanding the respondents not to evict him from the shop in question pursuant to the judgments aforesaid. The facts culled out from record, in brief, are that shop in question situated at Taxi stand road, civil lines, Rampur was let out to the petitioner by the owner/landlady Smt. Girja Mehrotra wife of Sri Shiv Nath Mehrotra at the rate of Rs. 225/- per month. After taking the shop on rent, tenant petitioner established his business in the shop in the name and style" R.K. Electronics". The rent was enhanced from time to time and was Rs. 525/- per month on the date of filing of the suit. After the death of landlady Smt. Girja Mehrotra, the ownership devolved upon her husband Sri Shiv Nath Mehrotra, who also expired on 21.12.2005 leaving behind respondent Nos. 1 to 4 as legal heirs and representatives of estate of the deceased. According to the petitioner, since there was no partition of the property and as such, all the legal heirs and representatives of the deceased started demanding rent from him and in these circumstances he by a notice dated 24.4.2006 through his counsel requested the landlords as to whom rent may be paid. The respondents are said to have refused to accept the notice, compelling the tenant petitioner to deposit rent of the shop in Misc. Case No. 58 of 2006, in the Court of Civil Judge, Rampur with effect from 1.7.2006, under Section 30(2) of the U.P. Urban Buildings (Regulation of Letting, Rent and Eviction) Act, 1972 (hereinafter referred to as the Act No. 13 of 1972).
(3.) THE landlord respondents served a notice dated 14.8.2006 upon the petitioner demanding rent of the shop in question with effect from 10.1.2006 and also terminated his tenancy. This notice was replied by the petitioner tenant inter alia that he had never refused to pay rent of the shop but due to dispute amongst the landlords and upon their refusal to accept the notice dated 24.4.2006, he was compelled to deposit the rent for the period in dispute under Section 30(2) of Act No. 13 of 1972 as stated above. An application under Section 21(1)(a) of U.P. Act No. 13 of 1972 was thereafter filed in the Court of the Prescribed Authority/Civil Judge (SD), Rampur on 25.9.2006 setting up a claim for release of the shop in question on the ground of establishing Gaurav Mehrotra, son of applicant landlord No. 1 in business. This application was registered as P. A. case No. 9 of 2006.;