MANOJ MISRA,J. - (1.) Heard Sri Anoop Trivedi for the tenant-petitioner; Sri Atul Dayal for the landlord-respondent; and perused the record.
(2.) The present petition has been filed challenging the orders dated 08.04.2013 and 24.10.2016 passed by the Prescribed Authority, Kanpur and Additional District Judge, Court No.15, Kanpur in Rent Case No. 11 of 2011 and Rent Appeal No. 38 of 2013 respectively.
(3.) A perusal of the record would reveal that the landlord-respondent filed release application under Section 21(1)(a) of the U.P. Act No. 13 of 1972 against the tenant-petitioner for release of the accommodation in dispute for opening a clinic to settle his daughter-in-law, who was a child specialist, at Kanpur. The petitioner himself is a doctor and from the accommodation in dispute he was running his own clinic. According to the case of the landlord, the tenant-petitioner had another shop at Darshan Purwa, Kanpur from where he was running another clinic. The need set up by the landlord was contested on following grounds:- (a) that the landlord's daughter-in-law was established as a doctor in New Delhi and that she would be interested in working at Kanpur; and (b) that already two shops were got released by the landlord, one was from National Cycle Mart and the other was from one Inderjeet Singh and, therefore, the need, if any, stood satisfied.;