S.U.Khan, J. - (1.) This writ petition was earlier allowed by me on 24.3.2006 in the absence of tenant-respondent as at that time no one had appeared on his behalf. Today restoration/re-hearing application has been allowed and the said order has been set aside. Second paragraph of the said judgment is quoted below which contains necessary facts: "This is landlord's writ petition arising out of eviction/release proceedings initiated by him against tenant respondent No. 2 Raj Kumar Bahai 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. 94 of 1998. Prescribed Authority/1st Additional Civil Judge, Varanasi through judgment and order dated 20.2.1995 allowed the release application. Against the said judgment and order tenant-respondent No. 2 filed Rent Appeal No. 117 of 1995. Xth A.D.J., Varanasi through judgment and order dated 5.3.1998 allowed the appeal, set aside the judgment and order passed by the Prescribed Authority and dismissed the release application of the petitioner landlord hence this writ petition."
(2.) Appellate Court allowed the appeal mainly on the ground that landlord was comfortably residing in the house of his brother R.H. Arora hence his need was not bonafide. On behalf of landlord it had been argued before the lower Appellate Court that his relation with his brother was not cordial. Appellate Court did not believe the said version for want of precise instances and cause of disharmony between the two brothers. Learned Counsel for tenant-respondent vehemently argued that the brother of the landlord is permanently residing a Kolkata for more than a decade and he has got absolutely no intention of coming back to Varanasi. Learned Counsel has further argued that there is absolutely no difference between the two brothers and theory of strained relationship has been put forward only for evicting the tenant from the house in dispute.
(3.) Even if all these assertions made on behalf of tenant are accepted to be correct still no difference will be made. If a person is residing as a licensee in his brother's house then his need for his own house in quite bonafide even if his relationship with his brother is quite cordial and further his brother does not require the said house for his personal residence. As held by Supreme Court in Mrs. Keehal Eknath Kshirsagr v. M/s. Traders and Agencies, A.I.R. 1997 S.C. 59, availability of an accommodation on licence or by courtesy of some relation or friend is no ground to reject the release application.;