Sudhir Agarwal, J. - (1.) Heard Sri Atul Dayal, learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri Arun Kumar Shukla, learned counsel for the respondents.
(2.) The Trial Court vide order dated 18.11.2000 has allowed respondent's application filed under Section 21 (1) (b) of Uttar Pradesh Urban Buildings (Regulation of Letting, Rent and Eviction) Act, 1972 (hereinafter referred to as "Act, 1972") directing petitioners to vacate and hand over possession of premises in question to the plaintiff respondent landlord for the purpose of demolition and reconstruction and appellate order dated 11.9.2002 passed by District Judge, Kanpur dismissing petitioners' appeals. There were two appeals before the District Judge but both were filed by petitioners tenants against the same judgment of the Trial Court dated 18.11.2000.
(3.) Sri Atul Dayal, learned counsel for the petitioners contended that paras 10 and 11 of release application shows that respondent landlord also sought relief for release of accommodation in question under Section 21(1) (a) of Act, 1972 though the application has been decided under Section 21(1) (b) of Act, 1972. Since the application was filed within three years after the date of purchase without complying with the requirement of proviso to Section 21(1) (a), the application was not maintainable.;