S.U.Khan, J. - (1.) THIS is landlord's writ petition arising out of eviction/release proceedings initiated by him against original tenant -respondent No. 3 Mauji Ram on the ground of bona fide need under section 21 of U.P. Act No. 13 of 1972 in the form of P.A. Case No. 28 of 1980. Prescribed Authority/First Additional Munsif, Ghaziabad rejected the release application through judgment and order dated 23.9.1981. Against the said judgment and order landlord -petitioner filed Miscellaneous Appeal No. 90 of 1981. VII A.D.J. Ghaziabad through judgment and order dated 12.1.1987 dismissed the appeal, hence this writ petition. Property in dispute is in the form of two adjoining shops - -one big and the other small. Rent of small shop is Rs. 58/ - per month and that of the big shop is Rs. 10/ - per month.
(2.) BOTH the Courts below held that need of the landlord was bona fide. However, both the Courts below decided the matter against the landlord on the ground of comparative hardship. They found that in case of eviction tenant would suffer greater hardship than the hardship which would be suffered by the landlord in case of rejection of release application. Landlord stated that he had four sons. Vijendra Narain, one of the sons was occupying two small shops adjacent to the shops in dispute. Shops in dispute were required for the other two sons of landlord i.e. Sandeep Kumar and Pradeep Kumar. Landlord was having no concern with his 4th son.
(3.) VIJENDRA Narain purchased a shop in Vivekanand Nagar. However, later on he sold the same. According to the landlord he persuaded Vijendra Narain to shift his business to the shop, which he had purchased in Vivekanand Nagar but he did not listen to him and against his wishes he continued to do the business in the two small shops adjoining to the two shops in dispute.;