A.K.YOG, J. - (1.) ONE Ganesh Shankar Rawat, claiming to be the owner of premises No. 105/28, Prem Nagar, Kanpur Nagar filed release application under Section 16 (1) (b) of U.P. Act No. XIII of 1972 before Delegated Authority/Rent Control and Eviction Officer, Kanpur Nagar on 4 -2 -1992/Annexure 3 to the writ petition, on the ground that he was in possession of the aforesaid entire premises except one tin shed room with open terrace, which was earlier in the tenancy of his tenant Sahdeo Prasad, who died about four years prior to the filing of the present release application leaving his widow, Smt. Bitto Devi as who lived with her daughter before shifting to her own house - plot No. 65 Sanjay Gandhi Nagar Naubasta, Kanpur about four months prior to the filing of the release application. In para 4 of the release application, it is also contended that the said Bitto Devi had handed over unlawfully the possession of tin shed room with open terrace to one Murari Lal without the consent of the owner (Ganesh Shankar Rawat -respondent No. 3) and that said Murari Lal illegally occupied the accommodation in question without any allotment. It is also stated that the owner of the premises had filed a suit before the Civil Court for eviction of the said Murari Lal from the accommodation in question against certain portion of the said premises other than the accommodation in question pending in the Court of A.C.M.M. IXth Kanpur.
(2.) IT may be noted that Murari Lal died during the pendency of the release proceedings and hence legal representatives/heirs of said Murari Lal were substituted. Petitioner Nos. 2, 3, 4, 5 and 6 and proformarespondents Nos. 4 and 5 were substituted as legal representatives/heirs of said deceased Murari Lal. Petitioner No. 1 Murari Lal, even though he is dead. The Rent Control Inspector submitted report dated 14 -2 -1992 in pursuance to the directions given by the Delegated Authority (Annexure 4 to the petition). The Rent Control Inspector found that Murari Lal was in possession of the accommodation in question. He also noted that earlier Sahedeo Prasad was the tenant and after having died, his wife Bitto Devi continued to reside therein as tenant. The Rent Control Inspector also noted videpara 3 of his report that Bitto Devi had handed over possession to said Murari Lal being in collusion with each other and that Bitto Devi had removed all her goods and shifted to her own house at house plot No. 60 Sanjay Gandhi Nagar, Naubasta, Kanpur Nagar and ever since the said Murari Lal was in unauthorised possession of the accommodation in question. The aforesaid information solicited by the Rent Control Inspector was supported by the statement of one Bishun Sarup Saxena R/o 105/3 - B, Prem Nagar, Kanpur Nagar. The Rent Control Inspector, videPara -4 of his report also noted that Murari Lal claimed to be co -owner of the house in question.
(3.) MURARI Lal thereafter filed his objection dated 7 -9 - 1992/Annexure -5 to the writ petition. There is no pleading in the petition, that no counter reply to the said objection filed by Murari Lal, was filed by Ganesh Shankar Rawat (respondent No. 3). Learned Counsel for the contesting respondent/caveator -applicant Sri Atul Dayal, however, made a statement that a counter reply was filed denying the allegation of Murari Lal that he was owner of the house in question. Sri Atul Dayal further informed this Court that a regular suit for eviction of Murari Lal was filed by Ganesh Shankar Rawat, respondent No. 3 on the ground that he was merely a licensee of some of the portions of the premises (apart from the accommodation in question).;