Sibghat Ullah Khan, J. - (1.) LIST revised. No one appears for the tenant -respondent. Heard learned Counsel for landlord -petitioner.
(2.) LANDLORD -petitioner filed release application against tenant -respondent Nos. 2 and 3 for eviction on the ground of bona fide need in the form of P.A. Case No. 40 of 1983 before Prescribed Authority/IInd Additional Civil Judge, Meerut Property in dispute is commercial in nature. Petitioner landlord pleaded that he required the accommodation in dispute for establishing his shop for manufacturing batteries and that he was carrying on the said business from a tenanted shop on Delhi road which was not suitable for the said business. Prescribed authority allowed the release application through judgment and order dated 21.3.1986. Against the said judgment and order tenant respondents filed Misc. Appeal No. 79 of 1986. XIIth A.D.J., Meerut through judgment and order dated 13.4.1988 allowed the appeal, set aside the judgment and order passed by the prescribed authority and rejected the release application of the landlord -petitioner hence this writ petition. Rent of the accommodation in dispute in Rs. 60/ - per month and it is situated in Meerut.
(3.) APPELLATE Court found that landlord was comfortably carrying on his business from the shop which was in his tenancy occupation. The Supreme Court in G.K. Devi v. Ghanshyam Das : AIR 2000 SC 656 has held that a tenanted accommodation can never be taken into consideration while deciding bona fide need of the landlord.;