Shashi Kant Gupta, J. - (1.) This writ petition is directed against the order dated 11.3.2011 passed by the Additional District Judge, Special Judge (E.C. Act), Jhansi in RCA No.3 of 2010, Mamta Agnihotri v. Indrapal Shukla setting aside the judgment and order dated 13.1.2010 passed by the Prescribed Authority/J.S.C.C., Jhansi in P.A. Case No. 13 of 2007, Mamta Agnihotri v. Indrapal Shukla .
(2.) Brief facts of the case as set out in the writ petition are as follows;
(3.) An application under Section 21 (1) (a) of the UP Act No.13 of 1972 (in short "Act") was filed for the release of the disputed premises from the possession of petitioner-tenant. It was stated therein that the respondent is a widow having two minor sons; petitioner is a tenant in her House No. 486 (new number 486/1) situated at Nanak Ganj, Sipri Bazar, Jhansi on a monthly rent of Rs. 300/- Since the respondent is not having any source of income, she wants to open a school for small children and give tuitions to the students, for which the tenanted accommodation is required. It was further pleaded in the release application that the petitioner-tenant has constructed his own house No.190 at Nanak Ganj, Sipri Bazar, Jhansi. The tenant filed his written statement disputing and denying the allegations made in the release application and stated that the need of the petitioner-tenant was neither genuine nor bonafide. After hearing to the learned counsel for the parties, the Prescribed Authority by judgment and order dated 13.1.2010 came to the conclusion that the alleged need of the respondent-landlady was not bonafide and the comparative hardship also tilts in favour of the petitioner-tenant and the application for release of the disputed premises was not maintainable in view of third proviso to Section 21 (1) of the Act. ;