Sanjay Misra, J. - (1.) Heard learned Counsel for the petitioner.
(2.) The petitioner who is landlord of the premises in question seeks to challenge the judgment and order dated 12.9.2000 passed in Appeal No. 8 of 1997 Paltu Singh v. Sanjiv Kumar.
(3.) The facts of the case as contended by learned Counsel for the petitioner are that the petitioner had purchased the premises in question and after expiry of the relevant period he filed an application under section 21(1)(a) of U.P. Act No. XIII of 1972 for release of the premises for his personal need where he wanted to establish a business. The prescribed authority after considering the evidence led by the parties was of the view that the need of the petitioner was bona fide and the comparative hardship was also in favour of the petitioner. It therefore decreed the suit for eviction.;