Rakesh Tiwari, J.;-

Sri Anil Mehrotra, learned counsel for the petitioner is permitted to correct the writ petition by correcting the word " allowed' in place of word "dismissedl" wherever it has been typed that P.A. Case No. 2of 2004 was dismissed.

2. Supplementary affidavit filed by Sri A.K. Mehrotra and Sri Pranjal Mehrotra, learned counsel for the petitioner is taken on record.

3. After the correction has been made in the writ petition learned counsel for the parties have been heard and record is perused.

4. This petition challenges the validity and correctness of the order and judgment dated 28.7.2007 passed by the Prescribed Authority/Civil Judge (Senior Division), Gautam Budh Nagar as well as the order and judgment dated 24.1.2011 passed by the appellate Court dismissing the Rent Control Appeal No. 21 of 2007, appended as Annexures-6 and 11 respectively to the writ petition.

5. The facts culled out from the records are that respondent landlord filed release application under Section 21(1)(a) of Uttar Pradesh Urban Buildings ( Regulation Of Letting, Rent And Eviction) Act, 1972 ( hereinafter referred to as U.P. Act No. XXIII of 1972) in respect of a shop under the tenancy of the p

Click Here to Read the rest of this document