S.U. Khan, J. - (1.) This is tenant's writ petition arising out of eviction/release proceedings initiated by landlord respondent No. 2 Kishan Lal on the ground of bonafide need under Section 21 of U.P. Act No. 13 of 1972 in the form of P.A. case No. 14 of 1982.
(2.) Landlord pleaded that a partition had taken place in the year 1965 in his family and the ancestral residential house had gone in the share of his father and his brother and the house in dispute and other adjoining houses fell in the share of the landlord. Landlord further pleaded that all the houses, which came in his share, were in the occupation of the tenants. Tenant pleaded that some of those houses had been let out by the landlord recently hence his need was not bonafide. It was further pleaded on his behalf that ancestral house of the landlord was quite big rather palatial and in the said house he was residing quite comfortably and partition of 1965 was sham and entered into only to avoid tax. The prescribed authority held that landlord did not have any bonafide need and tenant would suffer greater hardship in case of eviction as his financial position was not such that he could pay more rent than the rent of the house in dispute i.e. Rs. 65/- per month and that for Rs. 65/- per month such house was no more available in Jhansi. Prescribed authority through judgment and order dated 12.11.1982 dismissed the release application. Against the said judgment and order landlord filed R.C. Appeal No. 66 of 1983.
(3.) The Appellate Court held that as partition was entered into about 17 years before filing of the release application hence it could be said that it was affected for creating the ground to evict the tenant. In respect of the tenants of the other houses belonging to the landlord appellate Court held that Sri R.P. Lavania and Sri Nimesh who were the tenants were Judicial Officers and they had been allotted those houses by R.C. & E.O. hence it could not be said that as landlord' himself let out those houses, his need stood disproved.;