- (1.) YATINDRA Singh, J. This is the tenant's writ petition against the order dated 12-4-1996 and 18-1-1999 passed by Respondent No. 2 and 1 (Annexures 11 and 16 to the writ petition) allowing the landlord's application under Section 21 (l) (a) of U. P. Urban Buildings (Regula tion of Letting, Rent and Eviction) Act, 1972 (hereinafter as the Act only ). Both the Courts below held that the- (a) need of the landlord to expand his business is bonafide. (b) tenant has already purchased a house (House No. 64/55, Hewett Road, at Allahabad) in which he has constructed many shops and have shifted his business therein and is using the premises in question as godwown; (c) the need of the landlord is bona fide and great hardship will occasion to the landlord than tenant if their application is rejected.
(2.) I have heard Sri Ravi Kiran Jain, learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri S. N. Verma, learned counsel for caveator-respondent. Sri Jain has referred to the affidavits filed before the Prescribed Authority as Appellate Authority to show that the need of the landlord is not bona fide. He has also pointed out few para graphs of the release application to show that petitioners are not legal tenants of the premises in dispute. As far as first submis sion of Sri Ravi Kiran Jain is concerned it relates to the finding given by the Court below. Courts below have considered the affidavits arid thereafter recorded their finding. There is no illegality in the same. The tenant has shifted his business. He has accommodation available. In view of the facts and circumstances of the case there is no jurisdiction to interfere with the finding of the facts recorded by the Courts below. As far as second question is concerned both the authorities below have held that the applicants under Section 21 (l) (a) are the landlord and the petitioner is their tenant. There is no merit in second submis sion. Apart from it in case petitioners are not legal tenants they are not entitled to invoke equitable jurisdiction of this Court. The writ petition is dismissed. Six months'-time is granted to the. tenants to vacate the premises in dispute provided they file an undertaking in the form of an affidavit before the Prescribed Authority that they will hand-over the peaceful pos session of the premises in dispute to the landlord. Petition dismissed. .;