- (1.) SUDHIR Narain, J. This writ petition is directed against the order dated 23-2-1996, passed by respondent No. 1 rejecting the application of the petitioner for substitution.
(2.) BRIEFLY stated facts of the instant case are that the father of the petitioner, late Shri Gopi Lal Gupta, was tenant of house No. 273/4, Rail Bazar, Kanpur Nagar. Respondent No. 3, is landlord of this accommodation. He filed application for release of the disputed accommodation, under Section 21 (1) (a) of U. P. Urban Buildings (Regulation of Letting, Rent and Eviction) Act, 1972 (in short as the Act'), on the allegation that Gopi Lal was tenant of two rooms, Verandah etc. on the first floor of the house No. 273/4 Rail Bazar, Kanpur. He had purchased the house in the year 1983 for the residential purpose. His family consist, of his mother, wife and three children. He is residing in one room on the ground floor in the same house. Accommodation in his possession is insufficient for him. The tenant filed objection and contended that the need set up by the landlord, is not bona fide. The Prescribed Authority, allowed the application by order dated 27-1-1995. It found that the need of the landlord-respondent was bona fide and the tenant could shift to the house of his sons. The tenant filed appeal against aforesaid order under Section 22 of the Act. During the pendency of appeal, Gopi Lal Gupta tenant, died. An application for substitution was filed on 17-1-1996 by the petitioner stating that he is son of the deceased-tenant and is entitled to be substituted in his place.
(3.) RESPONDENT No. 3 filed objection. The first objection was that the applica tion should have been filed within 30 days from the date of death of person con cerned as provided under Rule 25 of U. P. Urban Buildings (Regulation of Letting, Rent and Eviction) Rules, 1972 (in short as the 'rules' ). Second objection was that the petitioner was not residing with his father at the time of his death and he will not be treated as heir and legal representative in view of definition as contained in clause (a) of Section 3 of the Act, which provides that, in case of a residential building, such only of his heirs as normally resided with him in the building at the time of his death, will be treated as tenant. The petitioner filed application for condonation of delay. It was stated that under the provisions of Code of Civil Procedure, the limitation for filing application for sub stitution is 90 days and under Rule 25, the limitation is 30 days but as he was under misapprehension on account of mistaken legal advice, he could not file the application within time.;