Vivek Kumar Birla, J. - (1.) Heard Sri Atul Dayal alongwith Sri Arvind Srivastava, learned counsel for the petitioners and Sri Ashish Kumar Singh, learned counsel appearing for the landlord-respondent.
(2.) Present petition has been filed for setting aside the judgment and order dated 13.11.2017 passed by Additional District Judge, Court No. 3, Saharanpur in Rent Control Appeal No. 18 of 2011 (Abdul Malik vs. Mushtaq Ahmad) and the order dated 30.5.2011 passed by Prescribed Authority / Judge Small Causes Court, Saharanpur in P.A. Case No. 17 of 1999 (Mushtaq Ahmad vs. Abdul Malik).
(3.) The release application was filed by the landlords on the ground that they are carrying on tailoring profession from their place of residence only and are having very small earning and therefore, the shops in dispute are required for the purpose of carrying on tailoring business as well as for establishing readymade garments business and the tenant is a person of sufficient means and therefore, he can shift to any other place, whereas the landlords do not have any other place for carrying on their business. The release application was filed by uncle and his nephews for their purposes. The same was contested on the ground that the need is not bonafide and sons of Mushtaq are engaged in different business and occupation and one son of Mushtaq is engaged in tailoring business, which has been established separately and others are engaged in car decoration business and therefore, their need is not bonafide. It was also contended that the defendants-petitioners herein are tenants in the property in dispute since 1965 and they have earned goodwill.;