M.P.SAXENA,J. - (1.) THIS is a tenant's petition arising out of proceedings under Section 21 of the U.P. Urban Buildings (Regula­tion of Letting, Rent and Eviction) Act, 1972.
(2.) ISHWAR Saran, opposite party Mo. 3. is the owner of House No. 18 Saket in the town of Meerut. A portion of this house consisting of drawing room, bed room with attached bath-room, dining room, kitchen and enclosed open space on the east was let out to the peti­tioner on a monthly rent of Rs. 150/-. The remaining portion of this house was in the occupation of the landlord opposite party. The latter moved an application under Section 21(1) (a) of the Act for release of the tenanted accommodation on the ground that the bona fide required it for his own use as marriages of his sons were to be solemnised and his grand children were to receive education in Meerut and the present accommodation in his possession was not sufficient to meet his requirements. He also claimed the benefit of Explanation (iv) to Section 21 (1) (a) of the Act as it existed at that time. The petitioner contested that application, inter alia, on the grounds that the landlord had no bona fide need for the disputed accommodation and the application was moved with a view to en­hance rent; that Explanation (iv) was not applicable to this case; that he never gave any undertaking to vacate the house and that greater hardship would be caused to him if the application was allow­ed then would have caused to the landlord by the rejection of the application.
(3.) THE Prescribed Authority came to the conclusion that Expla­nation (iv) to Section 21 (1) (a) of the Act was applicable to this case because the tenant was living in a portion of the building, the remaining portion whereof was in possession of the landlord for re­sidential purpose. In view of this finding he did not feel the neces­sity of comparing the relative hardship of the landlord and the tenant and allowed the release application on March 22, 1974.;