The main legal point established in the judgment is the interpretation of the definition of 'family' under section 3 (g) of the U.P. Urban Buildings (Regulation of Letting, Rent and Eviction) Act, 1972, and the consideration of subsequent events in determining the bona fide need for the release of the shop.

VEDPAL, J.-

This petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India has been filed by the petitioner/tenant Shri Nizammuddin Khan (since deceased) challenging the judgment and order dated 23.1.1996 (wrongly written in the petition as 22.1.1996) passed by the than IIIrd Additional District and Sessions Judge, Bahriach in Rent Appeal No. 28 of 1992 : Nizammuddin Khan v. Shivendra Kumar and others as contained in Annexure No.6 of the writ petition upholding the judgment and order dated 10.2.1992 (wrongly written as 10.2.1995 in the petition) passed by the Prescribed Authority/Munsif, Bahriach in P.A. Case No.9 of 1983 : Smt. Saubhagyawati Oevi (since deceased) v. Shri Nizammuddin Khan and others as contained in Annexure No.5 to the writ petition.

2. The relevant facts in brief, for determination of this writ petition are that Smt. Saubhagyawati Devi, landlord of the shop in question had preferred an application under section 21 (1) (a) of the U.P. Urban Buildings (Regulation of Letting, Rent and Eviction) Act, 1972 (hereinafter referred to as the 'Act') against Shri Nizammuddin Khan for the release of the shop in question on the ground that the same is required after demolition and new construction for setting up her grand son Shri Dhananjaya Kumar Agarwal.

3. During the pendency of the said application, Smt. Saubhagyawati Devi died and in her place, Shivendra Kumar, Dhananjaya Kumar and Dhirendra Kumar were substituted as her legal representatives, who also prosecuted the release application on the basis of the need of Shri Dhananjaya Kumar Agarwal and adopted the pleadings of Smt. Saubhagyawati Devi of the aforesaid P.A. Case with consequent amendment.

4. The release application was contested by tenant Shri Nizamuddin Khan before the learned prescribed authority. It was stated by Shri Nizamuddin Khan that Shri Dhananjaya Kumar Agarwal is the grand-son of Smt. Saubhagyawati Devi and as such he is not a member of her family and release application for the need of a grand-son is not maintainable. It was further stated in the written statement that the need of Shri Dhananjaya Kumar Agarwal is neither bona fide nor genuine and the factum of comparative hardship also does not lie in his favour, as Shri Dhananjaya Kumar Agarwal has big business of Dal Mill, whole sale business of grains and has also several other shops and he can start business in those shops also and the release application is liable to be dismissed. During the pendency of the proceeding certain facts that some shops were got vacated and certain were constructed were also brought on record as subsequent events.

5. Both the parties adduced evidence in support of their respective claims. The learned prescribed authority held that the need of Shri Dhananjaya Kumar Agarwal for the release of the disputed shops is bona fide and genuine and factum of comparative hardship also lies in his favour and accordingly he allowed the release application in favour of Shri Dhananjaya Kumar Agarwal. The petitioner thereafter filed an appeal and the appellate authority also dismissed the appeal by the impugned" order dated 23.1.1996. Feeling aggrieved with the said order of release of shop passed by learned prescribed authority and confirmed by the appellate authority, the tenant filed this writ petition.

6. During the pendency of this petition tenant Shri Nizamuddin Khan also died and his legal representatives were brought on record who took the stand taken by Shri Nizamuddin Khan.

7. The parties with their consent, were finally heard at length on the merits of the case at this stage and the petition is being disposed of finally.

8. Learned Counsel for the petitioners urged that the release application of the shop in question under section 21 (1) (a) of the Act, for the need of Shri Dhananjaya Kumar Agarwal who is a grand-son of Smt. Saubhagyawati Devi, who died during the pendency of the release application before the learned prescribed authority, was not maintainable. It w