Honourable Rakesh Tiwari, J. - (1.) HEARD Sri Nitin Kumar Agrawal for petitioner, Sri A.N. Sinha holding brief of Sri J.P. Singh, counsel for caveator respondent No. 2 and perused the record.
(2.) THE petitioner claims himself to be the tenant of house in dispute No. 2/99, Noniyar Tola, Nawabganj,.Kanpur Nagaron monthly rent of Rs. 50/-. It is claimed by him that he entered in the premises as tenant of one Chhedi Lal, who was owner of the building, to whom rent was paid by him regularly month to month. It is stated that after death of Sri Chhedi Lal, his legal heirs executed a sale-deed dated 30.8.2005 in favour of Sri R.K. Gupta son of Sri Shyam Lal Gupta, resident of 61/213, Canal Road, Kanpur Nagar. On coming to know about sale of the house, the petitioner after sometime tried to pay rent to the subsequent purchaser- respondent No. 2 Sri R.K. Gupta, who it is stated did not accept it, hence the petitioner sent the same through Money Order to the subsequent purchaser/new landlord, who denied to accept the Money Order too. According to the petitioner, under these compelling circumstances,he deposited the rent under Section 30 of U.P. Urban Buildings (Regulation of Letting, Rent and Eviction) Act, 1972 (hereinafter referred to as the Act) before Civil Judge (JD), Kanpur Nagar in case No. 53/70 of 2007, Sita Ram v. Rakesh Gupta. Counsel for the petitioner has submitted that in the meantime respondent No. 1 Gopal son of Sri Om Prakash, resident of 133/360, Kidwai Nagar, Kanpur moved an application before the Rent Control and Eviction Officer/A.C.M. Vlth, Kanpur Nagar under Section 12 of the Act for allotment of the accommodation in dispute to him, which was registered as case No. 38 of 2009. On receipt of the application aforesaid, the Rent Control and Eviction Officer/ A.C.M. VI, Kanpur Nagar vide his order dated 31.10.2009, directed Rent Control Inspector for making an enquiry under Rule 8 (2) U.P. Urban Buildings (Regulation of Letting, Rent and Eviction) Rules, 1972. After inspection, the Rent Control Inspector submitted his report dated 14.12.2009 to the effect that petitioner was found living in the accommodation. Affidavits were filed by the tenant petitioner as well as landlord in support of their respective claims. The petitioner on the one hand, claimed that he was residing in the accommodation since 1985. The landlord on the other claimed that petitioner had entered into the accommodation with effect from 1.6.1999 as was informed to him by the previous landlord. The parties filed documentary evidence and also adduced oral evidence in support of their contensions.
(3.) THE Rent Control and Eviction Officer/A.C.M., Kanpur Nagar on the basis of materials on record and evidence produced by the parties, by the impugned order dated 4.1.2011 declared vacancy holding that the petitioner had not been able to prove his case and had no right as tenant but release order for the accommodation has not been passed so far. It is at this stage that petitioner has filed this writ petition challenging the aforesaid order dated 4.1.2011 declaring vacancy of the premises in dispute. Counsel for the petitioner has submitted that he has no other alternative remedy as the order declaring vacancy is not final, hence no revision lies against the said order.;