D.A.Desai, J.

(1) A tenant under a decree of eviction is the appellant in this appeal by special, leave. Respondent Smt. Maqbool Begum initiated two separate actions being N.C.C.s Nos. 15 and 16 of 1977 in the court of the Prescribed Authority, Nainital, for eviction of two tenants) one being the present appellant and another, one Kishan Chand Pandey, under S. 21(1) (a) of the U. P. Urban Building (Regulations of Letting, Rent and Eviction) Act, 1972, on the ground that the accommodation at her disposal was insufficient for her family and she needed additional accommodation. Both the cases were consolidated and the prescribed authority held that the landlady bona fide required the premises for her own use and her need was genuine and greater hardship would be caused to her if her application for release of accommodation was rejected. Consistent with these findings the application for release of accommodation was granted in favour of the landlady. After an unsuccessful appeal by the tenant, he moved the High court under Article 227 of the Constitution. Before the High court it was contended that the landlady had purchased the house of which possession was sough