Sudhir Agarwal, J. - (1.) Heard Sri Ravi Kiran Jain, learned Senior Advocate assisted by Sri Prashant Mishra, learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri K.K. Arora, learned counsel for respondent no. 2.
(2.) The petitioner admittedly is a tenant in a residential accommodation, i.e., a flat on the second floor of House No. 26/59, Birhana Road, Kanpur Nagar and the said building and accommodation is owned by respondent no. 2. The landlord-respondent no. 2 instituted proceedings for release of aforesaid accommodation through an application filed under Section 21(1)(a) of U.P. Urban Buildings (Regulation of Letting, Rent and Eviction) Act, 1972 (hereinafter referred to as the "Act, 1972") registered as Rent Control Case No. 21 of 1993 filed before Prescribed Authority/Judge Small Cause Court No. 2, Kanpur Nagar and the reason for release of said accommodation she assigned in paras 4 and 5 of application, reads as under: "(4) That in the meantime the Income Tax Deptt. attached premises No. 7/93, Tilak Nagar, Kanpur owned by the applicant's husband and his brother Late 2 Rameshwar Pd. Gupta. The Income Tax Deptt. has also started to proceeding for sale of premises No. 7/93, Tilak Nagar, Kanpur which are being contested. However, there is every likelihood of the said premises being sold and the applicant and her family being evicted therefrom. (5) That the applicant in these circumstances has to think of shifting to some other premises and as she owns house No. 26/59, Birhana Road, Kanpur she has naturally to fall back upon the said premises."
(3.) The application was contested by petitioner and Prescribed Authority finding no genuinety or bona fide in the alleged personal need of landlord-respondent no. 2, rejected application vide judgment and order dated 18.12.1998. Aggrieved thereto the respondent no. 2 preferred Rent Control Appeal No. 21 of 1999 and the same has been allowed by Appellate Court by means of impugned order dated 31.01.2002 observing that since apprehension of respondent no. 2 is real and substantial that the house in which she is residing is likely to be sold in very near future by Income Tax Department pursuant to some recovery proceedings, she is entitled for release of accommodation in question and hence, setting aside judgment dated 18.12.1998 passed by Trial Court, allowed appeal resulting in allowing respondent no. 2's application and has directed petitioner to vacate premises in question.;