Gyanendra Kumar, J. - (1.) ON a difference of opinion between Satish Chandra and K.N. Srivastava, JJ. the following question has been referred to me for opinion by the Chief Justice: Whether on the facts and circumstances of the case, the subject -matter of the lease was an 'accommodation' within the meaning of U.P. Rent Control Act?
(2.) IN order to answer the above question it is necessary to determine as to what exactly was the subject -matter of the lease and whether it fell within the definition of the word 'accommodation' as contemplated by U.P. (Temp.) Control of Rent and Eviction Act. The word 'accommodation' as commonly understood merely means a lodging, a quarter or space in a building. But the U.P. (Temp.) Control of Rent and Eviction Act has given the following special meaning to the word in Section 2(a), as amended by Act XVII of 1954.
(3.) ACCOMMODATION ' 'means residential and non -residential accommodation in any building or part of a building and includes: (i) gardens, grounds and out houses, if any, appurtenant to such building or part of a building; (ii) Any furniture supplied by the landlord for use in such building or part of a building; (iii) any fittings affixed to such building or part of a building, but does not include any accommodation used as a factory or for an industrial purpose where the business carried on in or upon the building is also leased out to the lessee by the same transaction.;