MUNNA JOGI Vs. ISRAR KHAN AND ANOTHER

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri P.K. Srivastava for the respondent.

(2.) The present petition has been filed challenging the orders dated 21.02009 and 30.01.2017 passed by the Prescribed Authority/Additional Civil Judge (Senior Division)/A.C.M.M., Court No.5, Kanpur Nagar in Rent Case No.18 of 2016 and Additional District Judge, Court No.1, Kanpur Nagar in Rent Appeal No.24 of 2009 respectively.

(3.) A perusal of the record would reveal that the landlord-respondents filed application against the petitioner for release of the accommodation comprising one Kothri, tinshed, kitchen, latrine, etc. on the ground floor by claiming that the landlord had been residing on the first floor and had a large family of nine members and the accommodation in their possession was insufficient and, therefore, they required the accommodation in dispute for their residential need. The release application was contested by the tenant-petitioner on multiple grounds. One of the grounds taken was that though the landlord had claimed that he had gained absolute right over the property on the basis of Hiba made by his father but the same was not proved and, therefore, the landlord would, at best, be a co-owner of the suit property and would therefore have no right to file the release application without joining other co-landlords. It was also claimed that the landlord had already sold part interest in the suit property to one Nayab Ali whose name was recorded in the assessment records of the municipality and, therefore, without joining the said owner, the release application was not maintainable. Another ground which was taken was that the landlord had several other accommodations and had no need for the accommodation in dispute.