- (1.) S. U. Khan, J. Heard learned Counsel for the parties. Landlord-respondent No. 2 - Purshottam Narain purchased the property in dispute from its previous owner landlord on 27-8- 1977. Petitioners were tenants in the said property since before the said date. Thereafter in the year 1978 new landlord respondent No. 2 Purshottam Narain filed release application against tenant-petitioners under Section 21 of U. P. Urban Building (Regulation of letting, Rent and Eviction) Act, 1972. The application was rejected on the ground that it had been filed within three years from the date of purchase. Thereafter second release application was filed on 29-9-1980. The said application was registered as U. P. U. B. Case No. 94 of 1980. Prescribed Authority/1st Additional Civil Judge, Aligarh rejected the release application on 23-9-1982. Against the said order landlord-respondent No. 2 filed U. P. U. B. Appeal No. 91 of 1982. Additional District Judge/special Judge (E. C. Act), Aligarh allowed the appeal on 5-2-1987, set aside the order of the Prescribed Authority and allowed the release application. The said order of the appellate Court has been challenged by the tenants-petitioners through this writ petition.
(2.) NOTICE was given on 9-3-1980. Even though in the notice 30 days time was granted to vacate however release application was actually filed after more than six months i. e. On 29-9- 1980. Appellate Court, therefore, found that the release application could not be rejected on the ground of defective notice. First proviso to Section 21 of the Act provides as under : S. 21. . . . . . . . . (a ). . . . . . . . . (b ). . . . . . . . . Provided that where the building was in the occupation of a tenant since before its purchase by the landlord, such purchase being made after the commencement of this Act, no application shall be entertained on the grounds mentioned in clause (a), unless a period of three years has elapsed since the date of such acquisition and the landlord has given a notice in that behalf to the tenant not less than six months before such application, and such notice may be given even before the expiration of the aforesaid period of three years. Under the aforesaid proviso it is not necessary that notice must be of six months. The only thing which is required is that application shall be filed after six months of notice. Section-80 C. P. C. also contains similar provision. In the following authorities it was held that even if notice under Section 80 C. P. C. demanded compliance in less than two months still if suit was instituted after two months from service of notice, it was quite all right. 1. Union of India v. M. Agarwal, AIR 1952 Assam 141 2. B. Tea Co. v. Dominion of India, AIR 1955 Col. 360 5. Similar principle will apply to the notice under first proviso to Section 21 of the Act. 6. I, therefore, fully agree with the view of the appellate Court that application having been filed after six months of notice as well as after three years of purchase was quite maintainable even though the notice was only of one month. 7. Landlord is residing in a tenanted house and paying rent of Rs. 125/- per month. The rent of the accommodation in dispute is only Rs. 10/- per month. This fact proves bona fide need beyond any doubt. Landlord has got no other accommodation. The tenants have not made any effort to search any alternative accommodation. I do not find least error in the order passed by the appellate Court in allowing the release application. Accordingly, writ petition is dismissed. However, tenants- petitioners are granted six months time to vacate provided that : (1) Within one month from today they file an undertaking before the Prescribed Authority to the effect that on or before the expiry of aforesaid period of six months they will willingly vacate and handover possession of the property in dispute to the landlord-respondent. (2) For this period of six months which has been granted to the petitioners to vacate they are required to pay Rs. 3,000/- (at the rate of Rs. 500/- per month) as damages for use and occupation. This amount shall also be deposited within one month before the Prescribed Authority and shall immediately be paid to the landlord-respondent. 8. In case of default in compliance of any of these conditions tenants petitioners shall be evicted through process of Court immediately after one month. 9. It is further directed that in case undertaking is not filed or Rs. 3,000/- are not deposited within one month then tenant petitioner shall be liable to pay damages at the rate of Rs. 2,000/- per month since after one month till the date of actual vacation. 10. Similarly if after filing the aforesaid undertaking and depositing Rs. 3,000/- the accommodation in dispute is not vacated on the expiry of six months then damages for use and occupation shall be payable at the rate of Rs. 2,000/- per month since after six months till actual vacation. Petition dismissed. .;