Sudhir Agarwal, J. - (1.) Heard Sri Om Prakash, Advocate, holding brief of Sri S.Mandhyan, learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri R.K.Pandey, Advocate, for the respondents.
(2.) The writ petition is directed against judgment and order dated 10.11.2000 passed by respondent no.1 allowing tenant's appeal and setting aside Prescribed Authority's order dated 19.3.1999 passed in favour of landlord under Section 21(1)(a) of Uttar Pradesh Urban Buildings (Regulation of Letting, Rent and Eviction) Act, 1972 (hereinafter referred to as "Act, 1972").
(3.) The Appellate Court has dismissed landlord's aforesaid application holding that neither need set up by petitioner landlord is genuine or bona fide nor petitioner has come up with clean hands by placing correct fact before the Court below. The petitioner came with a case that he is a doctor for treatment of human being and is registered practitioner hence wants shop in question for the said purpose but it was found by Appellate Court that petitioner was a veterinary science degree holder and therefore his very basic claim was false. In para 7 of his rejoinder affidavit filed before competent authority, copy whereof is Annexure 4 to the writ petition, petitioner has stated as under: ...VERNACULLAR MATTER OMITTED... ;