Sibghat Ullah Khan, J. - (1.) LIST revised. No one is present for respondents. Heard learned Counsel for the petitioner. This writ petition arises out of eviction/release proceeding initiated by the landlady -petitioner against tenant -respondent No. 2 Farhat Hasan (since deceased and survived by legal representative) on the ground of bona fide need under section 21 of the U.P. Rent Regulations Act (U.P. Act No. 13/72). Accommodation in dispute is a house. Landlady pleaded that she was married and residing with her husband at Lucknow. However, latter on there was some dispute between her husband and his brothers hence she and her husband along with their children had to shift to Banda where property in dispute is situate. She further stated that she was residing as a licensee in her brother's house. Release application was registered as Rent Case No. 3/87 on the file of Prescribed Authority/Munsif Banda which was allowed on 26.5.1989. Against the said judgment and order tenant -respondent No. 2 Farha Hasan filed Rent Appeal No. 3/89, II A.D.J., Banda through judgment and order dated 28.1.1991 allowed the appeal, set aside the judgment and order passed by the Prescribed Authority and dismissed the release application filed by the landlady -petitioner hence this writ petition.
(2.) LOWER Appellate Court held that it was not established that applicant was permanently residing in Banda and had left Lucknow for good. Lower Appellate Court was unnecessarily critical of the petitioner on the ground that out of her several tenants she had chosen only respondent No. 2. Lower Appellate Court in its judgment on page 109 of paper book has also observed that although the applicant is free to seek eviction of all or any of the tenants yet she has to make it clear that why the other tenants are not being evicted and absence of such an explanation goes against the applicant. It was the choice of the landlady to file release application against any of her tenants. (Vide R. Kumar v. Firm P. Machinery, : 2000 (38) ALR 458 (SC) and Savitri Sahay v. S. Prashad : 2002 (49) ALR 756 (SC) : 2003 (1) AIC 994). Appellate Court was not justified in criticizing the landlady for not explaining the reasons as to why he did not file release application against other tenants.
(3.) MERE fact that husband of the landlady possessed house at Lucknow could not disentitle the landlady for seeking release of house in dispute situate in Banda.;