Sibghat Ullah Khan, J. - (1.)HEARD learned Counsel for both the parties. It is landlord's writ petition arising out of eviction/release proceedings initiated by him against tenant respondent No. 1 on the ground of bona fide need under section 21(1)(a) of U.P. Act No. 13 of 1972 in the form of P.A. Case No. 15 of 1990 on the file of Prescribed Authority/Additional Civil Judge Jhansi. Property in dispute is a shop. Landlord set up the need for his son Ghan Shyam Das in business from the shop in dispute. It was further stated in the release application that in the adjoining shop, landlord was doing business of repairing cycles. It was also stated that son of the landlord was a tempo driver. Prescribed Authority through judgment and order dated 19.11.2002 allowed the release application. Against the said judgment and order tenant respondent No. 1 filed Rent Control Appeal No. 49 of 1992. District Judge, Jhansi through judgment and order dated 7.10.1994 allowed the appeal, set aside the judgment and order of the Prescribed Authority and dismissed the release application of the landlord, hence this writ petition by the landlord.
(2.)PRESCRIBED Authority had also held that the tenant had purchased a house on the ground floor in which he could carry on his business of tailoring. Prescribed Authority also found that another shop was also available to the tenant regarding which he had stated that he was using the same for storing merchandise.
Appellate Court held that Ghan Shyam Das the son of the landlord for whose need release application was filed, was doing business of sale of general merchandise and earthen post from the adjacent shop i.e., the shop in which his father was doing business. From this fact Appellate Court inferred that the need was not bona fide. The Appellate Court further held that the landlord and his son were well established and engaged in the business in their shop.

(3.)IN respect of comparative hardship, Appellate Court did not say a single word regarding other accommodation available to the tenant. Appellate Court only said that in Sadar Bazar, Jhansi no shop was available to the tenant to do the business of ready made garments.