K.C. Agrawal, J. - (1.) This writ petition is directed against the judgment of the III Additional District Judge, Etah dated 8-5-1975. By the aforesaid judgment the appeal filed by the respondent No. 2 against the judgment of the Prescribed Authority allowing the application filed under section 21 of U.P. Urban Buildings (Regulation of Letting, Rent and Eviction) Act, 1972 (herein. after referred to as U.P. Act No. 13 of 1972), was allowed.
(2.) Briefly stated, the facts are these : The petitioner admittedly is the owner of a house situated in Etah. She filed an application under section 21 of U P. Act No. 13 of 1972 for the release of the premises against the opposite party No. 2 on the ground that the premises was required by her husband for the purposes of his professional requirement. The petitioner also asserted that as the respondent No. 2 had constructed a residential building in Etah, therefore, he did not require the premises in question for his residence. The application was resisted by the opposite party No. 2. He denied that the need of the applicant was bonafide. He further asserted that the house alleged to have been constructed by him was not residential, therefore, the claim of the petitioner that the opposite party No. 2 could shift to that house was not justified.
(3.) The trial court allowed the application on the finding that the need of the applicant was genuine. Aggrieved by the judgment of the Prescribed Authority an appeal was filed by the opposite party No. 2 before the learned District Judge. The learned District Judge allowed the appeal by the impugned order. Hence this petition.;