JUDGMENT

Bhan, J.-Leave granted.

2. On the submissions made before us the only point required to be determined in these appeals is: as to whether the tenant-respondent (hereinafter referred to as "the respondent") having started using the premises in dispute for a purpose other than the purpose for which it was let out to him without the written consent of the appellant-landlord (hereinafter referred to as "the appellant") is liable to be evicted in view of the provisions of Section 20(2)(d) of the U.P. Urban Buildings (Regulation of Letting, Rent and Eviction) Act, 1972 (hereinafter referred to as "the Act") ?

3. The suit premises consisting of three rooms were admittedly let out for business purpose of selling of copies and books in the year 1970 by the father of the appellant to the respondent-tenant. In the year 1976, the respondent started manufacturing copies, registers sweet-meat boxes made of card board. In the year 1982 he installed a printing machine and started printing work without obtaining the written consent of the appellant.

4. It may be stated that father of the appellant died in the year 1978 leaving behind his widow Smt. Ramrati Devi and three sons, namely, Ramayan P