- (1.) THIS petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of india has been filed by the tenant to assail the order passed by the Prescribed authority in favour of the landlord under section 21 (1) (a) of the U. P. Urban buildings (Regulation of Letting, Rent and Eviction) Act, 1972 (hereinafter referred to as the Act) for eviction of the tenant from the shop in dispute. The petitioner has also sought the quashing of the order passed by the Appellate authority by which the appeal filed under section 22 of the Act, was dismissed.
(2.) THE records of the writ petition indicate that the landlord had filed an application under section 21 (1) (a) of the Act for release of the disputed shop and for eviction of the tenant on the ground that the landlord bona fide required the premises for setting up an independent business for his son who was of marriageable age. It was also asserted by the landlord that he would suffer greater hardship in the event the application was rejected. The tenant filed a reply to the aforesaid application and it was stated that the landlord could establish his eldest son in business from the portion available in the gallery of his residential portion.
(3.) THE Prescribed Authority found the need of the landlord to establish his eldest son in business to be bona fide as business could not done from the 4 feet gallery as alleged by the tenant. The Prescribed Authority also found that the landlord was likely to suffer greater hardship in the event the application was rejected and in coming to this conclusion, the Prescribed Authority has also taken into consideration the fact that during the pendency of the application filed by the landlord, the tenant had made no efforts whatsoever to obtain any alternative accommodation. The Appellate Authority has confirmed the findings of the Prescribed Authority.;