Krishna Murari, J. - (1.) -Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and Shri P.C. Jain, learned counsel appearing for the respondents.
(2.) By means of this petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, petitioners have approached this Court challenging the order dated 16.09.2006 passed by Rent Control and Eviction Officer declaring vacancy of the shop in dispute.
(3.) Facts as emerge from the pleadings of the parties are that respondent nos. 2 to 4 moved an application under Section 16 (1)(b) of the U.P. Urban Building (Regulation of Letting and Eviction) Act, 1972 (hereinafter referred to as the U.P. Act No. 13 of 1972) on the allegations, inter alia, that they are the owner-landlord of the shop in dispute having purchased by virtue of registered sale deed dated 24.06.1999 and the same was in unauthorised occupant of the petitioners without any allotment order and their possession being unauthorised, the same was vacant within the meaning of Section 13 of U.P. Act No. 13 of 1972. It was also pleaded that the shop was required for business purposes and the need was bona fide, urgent and pressing. Rent Control Inspector submitted a report that at the time of inspection, shop was found in the possession of the petitioners, who were carrying business of sale of cold drinks etc. and they failed to produce any allotment order. Petitioners filed objections to the release application alleging that they were sitting tenants for the last more than 27 years and were paying rent to the erstwhile landlord and had no knowledge of the sale deed as no notice was given to them. It was also pleaded that there was no need of the allotment order as when the shop was let out to them, it was newly constructed within the meaning of U.P. Act No. 13 of 1972. In support of the case, petitioners filed their own affidavit annexing therewith the receipts issued by the erstwhile landlord for the security amount of Rs. 30,000/- received from the petitioners as also affidavit of one Mohan Singh Verma, who witnessed the receipt of payment of Rs. 30,000/-. Rent Control and Eviction Officer disbelieved the case set up by the petitioners on the ground that they have failed to produce any evidence to establish that they were let out a newly constructed shop in January 1976.;