Rakesh Tiwari - (1.) -Heard counsel for the parties and perused the record.
(2.) THE petitioner is tenant in the disputed shop No. 54 situate at Mohalla Najab Ali, Aliganj, district Etah. Respondent-landlord instituted P.A. Case No. 14 of 1995, Subhash Babu v. Parshadi Lal Verma under Section 21 (1) (a) of the U. P. Urban Buildings (Regulation of Letting, Rent and Eviction) Act, 1972 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act') for release of the aforesaid shop on the ground of personal need of his two sons-Sri Diwari Lal and Sri Ajay Kumar for settling them in the shop, in dispute. The petitioner filed written statement denying the allegations in the release application, inter alia, that the landlord has no need of the disputed shop as other shops are also in possession of the landlord in Quasba Aliganj. Contention of the counsel of the petitioner is that in his replica, the landlord did not specifically deny the availability of alternate accommodation for his sons.
(3.) THE parties filed their affidavits and classificatory affidavits. The Prescribed Authority after considering the evidence rejected the release application vide judgment and order dated 26.11.1997 holding that comparative hardship of the tenant is proved to be greater than the landlord and need of the landlord was not bona fide. The relevant finding of the Prescribed Authority in this regard is as under : ...[VERNACULAR TEXT OMMITED]...;