JUDGMENT

Sethi, J.-The appellant is the tenant of a shop regarding which order of eviction was passed by the Prescribed Authority on 16.12.1997. After dismissal of his appeal, he moved the High Court by way of a writ petition which was dismissed vide the judgment impugned in this appeal. It has been concurrently held by the Prescribed Authority, the Appellate Court and the High Court that the respondent-landlord required the shop for his personal bonafide requirements.

2. Learned counsel appearing for the appellant has contended that as the proceedings initiated by the respondent-landlord were not maintainable under first proviso to sub-section (1) of Section 21 of the Uttar Pradesh Urban Buildings (Regulation of Letting, Rent and Eviction) Act, 1972 (hereinafter referred to as "the Act"), the Prescribed Authority, First Appellate court and the High Court committed a mistake of law by directing the appellant s eviction. It is contended that as no notice in terms of the aforesaid proviso was served upon the appellant-tenant, no cause of action accrued to the respondent-landlord for seeking his eviction under the provisions of the Act.

3. Undisputed facts of the case are that father of