Mahendra Dayal, J. - (1.)Heard Shri Brijesh Kumar Saxena, learned counsel for the petitioner and Shri Dev Raj Singh, learned counsel for the respondents and perused the record.
(2.)The petitioner has filed this writ petition challenging the order dated 27.05.2013, passed by Second Additional District Judge, Court No.19 / Additional Judge, Small Causes, Lucknow in Misc. Case No.5-C of 2010, whereby the application filed by the petitioner for recall of the order dated 24.07.2010 has been rejected.
(3.)The brief facts of the case are that the respondent No.2 (since deceased), filed an application for release under Section 21(1)(a) of the U.P. Act No.13 of 1972 against the petitioner and the respondents No.3 and 4. The release was sought on the ground that the respondents No.2 and 3 were tenants in respect of House No.551-Jha/219, Ram Nagar, Kanpur Road, Lucknow and the premises in their tenancy comprises of two shops. The rate of rent for one shop was Rs.700/- per month while the rate of rent in respect of another shop was Rs.200/- per month. It was also said that Smt. Hardevi was the original owner, who used to accept the rent from the tenants, but after her death on 16.10.1984, her nephew started accepting the rent. Shiv Kumar was accepting the rent from the respondent No.3 while Amar Singh used to collect the rent from the father of the respondent No.4, namely, Parmanand. After the death of Parmanand, the respondent No.4 started paying the rent. After the death of Shiv Kumar, the respondent No.3 paid rent to Kalawati. It was also said that Shiv Kumar and Amar Singh were real brothers and on the basis of mutual settlement, the respondent No.2 became the owner of both the shops. An information to this effect was also given to the respondents No.3 and 4 by means of registered letter dated 14.06.2005. It was also pleaded that that after retirement, the respondent No.2 was in great financial hardship and he had three sons. There was no accommodation for establishing his sons in business for which, the shops in possession of the respondents No.3 and 4 were needed.