Anjani Kumar, J. - (1.) Heard learned Counsel for the parties.
(2.) The petitioner, aggrieved by an order dated 22nd February 2005 passed by the Rent Control and Eviction Officer/Additional City Magistrate Vth, Kanpur Nagar, approached this Court by means of this writ petition for quashing of the aforesaid order.
(3.) The brief facts are that the petitioner, who alleges himself to be the tenant of the accommodation in question, has asserted that he has been entered into occupation of the accommodation in question by the erstwhile landlord under an agreement dated 21st September, 1995. He further asserts that after the erstwhile landlord sold out the building to the present landlord the present landlord has issued a notice through his advocate informing about the sale of the house and the liability of the petitioner to pay rent to the present landlord, Smt. Sona Gupta. The landlord has filed an application before the Rent Control and Eviction Officer seeking declaration of vacancy under Section 12 of U.P. Act No. 13 of 1972. During the pendency of the aforesaid proceedings before the Rent Control and Eviction Officer the petitioner filed the application when the matter was fixed for orders on 18th March 2005 to the effect that since the present landlord Smt. Sona Gupta has denied the facts that erstwhile landlord Sri Dina Nath Srivastava has allowed the petitioner to occupy the accommodation in question by virtue of agreement dated 21st September 1995 that Smt. Sona has denied that she had issued any notice dated 10th December 2002 to the petitioner through her Counsel Sri Ramesh Chandra Srivastava, informing the petitioner about the change of ownership, it is therefore, necessary to summon Smt. Sona Gupta and cross examine her.;