Surya Prakash Kesarwani, J. - (1.) Heard Sri Tarun Varma, learned counsel for the defendant-petitioner/tenant and Sri Arvind Srivastava, learned counsel for the plaintiffs-landlords/respondent nos. 1,2 and 3.
(2.) This writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution has bee filed praying for the following relief : "(i) to issue a suitable writ, order or direction in the nature of certiorari calling for the records and quashing the impugned judgment and order dated 10.01.2018 passed by the Additional District Judge (Court No.8), Gorakhpur in Rent Appeal No.03 of 2014 (Annexure-12) and that of the order dated 20.02.2014 passed by the Prescribed Authority/Judge Small Causes Court, Gorakhpur in P.A. Case No.26 of 2006- Vishundei-v-Radhey Shyam (Annexuure-9); (ii) Any other relief which this Hon'ble Court deem just and proper in the circumstances of the case may also be awarded to the petitioners. (iii) Award the cost of the writ petition to the petitioner." Submissions:-
(3.) Learned counsel for the petitioner submits as under: (i) By order dated 6.11.2015 in Writ-A No.59959 of 2015 (Radhey Shyam Gupta v. Additional District Judge and 8 others ), this Court made it open for the Prescribed Authority to consider the question of part release of the disputed shop while deciding the release application under Section 21 (1) (a) of U.P. Act 13 of 1972. (ii) After purchasing 1/4th share in the disputed house from the legal heirs and representatives of late Aniruddh Gupta, son of late Sri Heera Lal, by registered sale-deed dated 28.1.2013, the defendant-petitioner became co-owner of the house but with regard to three other brothers of late Sri Aniruddh Gupta, he remained a tenant. Therefore, his share should not have been released rather it should have been left with the defendant-petitioner as co-owner. He further submits that the partition of suit No.156 of 1987 with respect to the house in question is pending.;