S.U.KHAN, J. - (1.) HEARD Sri R.K. Chaube, learned Counsel for the tenant petitioner and Sri P.K. Jain, learned Senior Counsel, assisted y Sri M.W. Faridi, learned Counsel for the landlord respondent, who has appeared through caveat.
(2.) THIS is tenant's writ petition arising out of eviction/release proceedings initiated by landlord respondent on the ground of bona fide need under section 21 of U.P. Urban Buildings (Regulation of Letting, Rent and Eviction) Act, 1972 in the form of P.A. Case No. 6 of 2006. Prescribed Authority/J.S.C.C, Gorakhpur through judgment and order dated 4.10.2007 allowed the release application. Against the said judgment and order, tenant petitioner filed Misc. Rent Appeal No. 19 of 2007. District Judge, Gorakhpur dismissed the appeal through judgment and order dated 31.7.2008, hence this writ petition. Property in dispute is a residential house. Landlord asserted that he was residing on the first floor, which was sufficient for his need at the time when he let out the disputed portion to tenant petitioner as at that time his children were of quite tender age. However, due to passage of time of about 20-25 years, his children had grown, one son was married in 1993, in the year 1994 landlord retired, in the year 1997 second son of the landlord was also married and both the sons of the landlord were having their families including their children. It was further stated that at the time of filing of release application due to paucity of accommodation landlord with his wife was residing in the drawing/dining room along with his third unmarried son.
(3.) BOTH the Courts below found the need of the landlord to be bona fide. I do not find least error in the said findings. When children grow up, get married and have their children, the need of additional accommodation obviously in­creases. This principle is recognised by Rule 16 (1) (b) of the Rules framed under the Act also, which is quoted below : "16 (1) (b) Where a residential building was let out at the time when the sons of the landlord were minors and subsequently one or more of them has married, the additional requirement of accommodation for the land­lord's sons shall be given due consideration." ;