- (1.) Tenants have filed this petition for quashing the order dated 7th August, 2010 passed by the Prescribed Authority by which the application filed by the landlord under Section 21(1)(a) of the U.P. Urban Buildings (Regulation of Letting, Rent & Eviction) Act, 1972 (hereinafter referred to as the 'Act') for release of the shop in dispute has been allowed. The tenants have also sought the quashing of the judgment dated 25th October, 2011 by which the appeal filed by the tenants has been dismissed.
(2.) It is the submission of Sri Tarun Varma, learned counsel appearing for the petitioners that the landlord failed to establish the bona fide need for release of the shop inasmuch as the landlord was admittedly a partner in Atul Glass Works and there was nothing on the record to indicate that the partnership with his mother had been terminated and the Firm was being run solely by the mother. It is his submission that the Prescribed Authority as well as the Appellate Court have only assumed that the landlord has been ousted from the business by his mother merely because he married a girl who did not belong to his caste.
(3.) Sri Ashish Kumar Srivastava, has put in appearance on behalf of the respondents. It is the submission of learned counsel for the respondents that the impugned orders do not call for any interference. He has also pointed out that the tenant is paying a meager rent @ Rs. 240/- per month.;