- (1.) RAKESH Tiwari, J. Heard learned Counsel for the parties and perused the record.
(2.) THE petitioner-tenant has filed this writ petition challenging the validity and correctness of the impugned order dated 27-8- 2005 passed by the Additional District Judge, Court No. 1, Allahabad in Rent Control Appeal No. 135 of 1997 allowing the appeal and releasing the shop in dispute in favour of the landlords. The facts of this case in a short compass are that the parties to the dispute were earlier members of the same joint family. After partition in their family in the year 1960, the shop in dispute fell in the share of the father of the respondent- landlords 1 to 3. Both families are engaged in the same business of paper flower decoration. The petitioner claims to be the tenant of the disputed Shop in House No. 55, Chowk, Allahabad on rent at the rate of Rs. 400/- per month since 1960 alleged to have been let out to him by late Sri Gulab Chandra, father of respondent-landlords 2 and 3 and husband of respondent- landlord 1. Late Sri Gulab Chandra filed P. A. Case No. 56 of 1989 under Section 21 (1) (a) of U. P. Act No. XIII of 1972 for release of the shop in dispute to establish his son Rajeev Gupta, respondent No. 2, who was unemployed at the age of 21 years on the ground that his own shop in House No. 57 was available to the petitioner to do his business besides the shop at his residence at 484, Shahganj, Allahabad.
(3.) THE petitioner filed written statement denying the plaint allegations including the allegation that either shop in House No. 57, Chowk, Allahabad or at his residential house at Shahganj, Allahabad was available to him. It was further stated in the written statement that initially the father of the petitioner was the tenant of the shop in dispute at the rate of rent of Rs. 40/- per month and upon a suit instituted by late Sri Gulab Chandra before the Judge Small Cause Court the rent was enhanced to Rs. 400/- per month during the pendency, 'of the suit in pursuance of a compromise. It is alleged that it was the habit of Sri Gulab Chandra to get a shop vacated and thereafter to get the same allotted either to the same tenant or the other on higher rent and because of business rivalry also he had filed the release application against the petitioner and that after the death of the father of the petitioner Sri Gulab Chandra, the tenancy right devolved upon him.;