A.N.VARMA, J. - (1.) THIS petition is by a landlady. It is directed against an order passed by the learned Additional District Judge, Kanpur on 7.3.1980 allowing an appeal filed by the respondent No. 3 under Section 22 of U.P. Act No. 13 of 1972 and dismissing the application filed by the petitioner under Section 21(1)(a) and (b) of the aforesaid Act.
(2.) THE aforesaid application was filed by the landlady nearly 10 years ago, to be precise on 23rd November, 1972 for an order of eviction against the respondent No. 3 from the first floor of premises No. 32/145, Bagia Mani Ram Kanpur. The eviction was sought by the landlady both on the ground that she needed the same for her own use and occupation after demolishing and reconstructing the same as well as on the ground that the building under tenancy of the said respondent was in a dilapidated condition and was required for being demolished and reconstructed. In so far as her claim under clause (a) of Section 21(1) was concerned, the petitioner's case was that her family consisted of herself, her husband, a son Ashok Kumar, then aged 17 years and five daughters, namely, Beena Devi aged 14, Laxmi aged 12, Rama aged 6 Uma Devi aged 8 and Meera Devi aged 6. This large family of the landlady has to manage with a room on the ground floor of the same building and some accommodation on the second floor thereof. In between these two floors was the accommodation in the tenancy of the said respondent carrying a rent of Rs. 1,250/ - per month. The children of the landlady have now grown up since the building was let out. They need a separate place for study and sleep. With the strangers i.e., the family of the tenant occupying the first floor, the privacy of the family of the landlady particularly the daughters was being seriously affected as the bath -room and the latrine are on the ground floor. The family members of the landlady have, therefore, of necessity to pass through the portion which is in the tenancy of the said respondent. The landlady's husband has a shop at 50/88 Naughara, Kanpur where he goes every morning and returns at night. Under the circumstances the landlady feels unsafe and insecure quite apart from the inadequacy of the accommodation at present available with her and infringement of the privacy of her family particularly of the daughters.
(3.) IN regard to her case under clause (b) of Section 21(1), the landlady's plea was that the building under tenancy of the respondent No. 3 was in a dangerous condition. It was more than 80 years old and its life has already run out. The Chajjas on the first floor as well as on the second floor have almost fallen down. The dhannls or the store and Verandah of the disputed accommodation as well as the plants covering have also become totally worn out. The roof of the disputed accommodation is on the point of falling any moment. The walls of the rooms have also become completely dilapidated and have cracked at several places. The Engineer who examined the place is of the opinion that the accommodation was beyond repairs. The landlady has already got a plan for the reconstruction of the building submitted to the Nagar Mahapalika for sanction. The cost of construction would be around Rs. 20,000/ - which the landlady has the means of providing. In this view the building has become clearly dilapidated and unsafe not only for the tenant but also for the landlady's family.;