MAHENDRA DAYAL, J. - (1.) BY means of this writ petition, the petitioner has challenged the order dated 07.11.2013 passed by Rent Control and Eviction Officer/Additional City Magistrate -II, Lucknow in Case No.14/14/22/29/13 whereby the vacancy in respect of the shop situated on the ground floor of House No.332/5 -A, Gole Darwaja Chowk, Lucknow has been declared under Section 12 of the U.P. Urban Buildings (Regulation of Letting, Rent and Eviction) Act, 1972 (for short, "the Act").
(2.) THE facts in brief are that the opposite parties no.2 to 6 purchased the property in dispute in the year 2003 from Shri Nikhil Kapoor. The release application was filed by them under Section 16(1)(b) of the Act on 11.12.2008 before the R.C.E.O., Lucknow. It was stated in the release application that the shop in question was in the tenancy of the petitioner on a monthly rent of Rs.68.75 in which he was doing business of selling clothes in the name and style of M/s. Radheshyam Hari Shyam. It was further stated that the petitioner has moved his effects from the shop in question and has handed over its possession to Shri Trilok Chandra Agarwal, who is not his family member. Shri Trilok Chandra Agarwal has started his own business of chicken in the said shop under the name and style of Krishna Enterprises.
(3.) UPON filing of the release application, the R.C.E.O. directed the property to be inspected as provided under the Rules framed under the Act. The Tehsildar (Judicial), Lucknow inspected the property and submitted his report on 06.08.2009 indicating that that no one was found in the shop in question as the same was found closed. He further mentioned in the report that Shri Ram Narain Khanna told him that Shri Trilok Chandra Agarwal is carrying on business with his associates in the name of Krishna Enterprises. Learned R.C.E.O. on the basis of the aforesaid report issued notice to the parties and the petitioner on the receipt of the notice filed his objection stating therein that the shop in question was still in his possession and he has either vacated the shop nor has given its possession to any person. It was also mentioned in the objection that the shop was inspected on 06.08.2009 which fell on Thursday and the Chowk Market remains closed on Thursday. It was also stated in the objection that the business in the name of Krishna Enterprises is going on in the shop in question, which is registered firm having the petitioner and his two sons as partners. The petitioner also moved an application for re -inspection of the shop in question which was allowed on 02.06.2012. The Tehsildar (Judicial), Lucknow again inspected the shop on 07.08.2012 and submitted his second report indicating therein that at the time of his inspection the shop was found opened and the business of chicken garment was going on. The petitioner was present in shop. It was also mentioned in the report that the petitioner informed that the shop was being looked after by his sons while he carries of business in the adjacent shop. The petitioner also handed over the documents in respect of the registration of the firm, electricity bill, etc. to the Tehsildar. A notice was also issued to Shri Trilok Chandra Agarwal, who in pursuance of the notice appeared before the R.C.E.O. and filed his objection on 20.11.2012. It was specifically stated by him on oath that he had no concern with the disputed shop and the same was in occupation of the petitioner. The learned R.C.E.O., however, by means of the impugned order declared the vacancy on the ground that the petitioner has vacated the shop in question and handed over its possession to Shri Trilok Chandra Agarwal, who is not a member of his family. I have heard Shri Pritish Kumar, learned counsel for the petitioner and Shri Anurag Srivastava, who has appeared on behalf of the opposite parties no. 2 to 6 and have also gone through the record.;