Sudhir Agarwal, J.—

1. Heard Sri K.M.Garg, Advocate for the petitioner, Sri R.C.Singh, Advocate for respondents No.1 and 4 and Sri M.K. Gupta, Advocate for respondents No.5 to 10.

2. This writ petition is directed against judgment and order dated 19th July, 2001 (Annexure 21 to the writ petition) passed by XVIth Additional District Judge, Kanpur Nagar in Rent Appeal No.39 of 1999, allowing the appeal filed by respondents No.1 to 4 and setting aside Trial Court's judgment and order dated 23rd January, 1999 passed in Case No.12 of 1993 under Section 21(1)(b) of Uttar Pradesh Urban Buildings (Regulation of Letting, Rent and Eviction) Act, 1972 (hereinafter referred to as "Act, 1972"), directing the petitioner to hand over vacant possession of disputed accommodation to the respondents No.1 to 4 within 45 days so that respondents-landlords may demolish and reconstruct the same, whereafter the petitioner-tenant may get the accommodation again.

3. The respondents No.1 to 3 are sons of Sri Ganesh Shanker Gupta and respondent no.4 is the wife of respondent No.1. These four respondents filed an application under Section 21(1)(b) of Act, 1972 before Prescribed Authority, Kanpur Nagar registered as Release Case No.12 of 1993 stating that accommodation comprise of seven rooms, one store room, two kitchens, one Kothari, Dalan, Verandah, latrine, bathroom and courtyard situated on the ground floor of House No.25/13 (new number 25/16), Karachi Khana, Kanpur, is in the tenancy of petitioner and now being in dilapidated condition, needs to be demolished for reconstruction and therefore it be directed to be vacated for the said purpose.

4. The application was contested by the petitioner-tenant by filing written statement disputing the contention of respondents no.1 to 4 that the said accommodation is in dilapidated condition. The petitioner-tenant, in support of her stand, filed an Engineer Expert's report to demonstrate that as per the said report, disputed accommodation is quite sound and strong and not in dilapidated condition.

5. The landlord, on the contrary, filed another expert's report. The respondents No.1 to 4 (landlord) also admitted before Trial Court that entire house no.25/13(new 25/16), Karachi Khana, Kanpur measuring about 1380 sq.yards was initially owned by Sri Om Nath Kapoor, Son of Sri Amar Nath Kapoor wherefrom it was purchased by respondents No.1 to 4 vide sale deed dated 29th November, 1982, registered on 25th February, 1983. Now since the accommodation is in dilapidated condition hence needs reconstruction after demolition.

6. During pendency of application No.12 of 1993, about 122 sq. yards area of aforesaid disputed accommodation sought to be sold by respondents No.1 to 4 to respondents No.5 to 10 and this fact was brought to the notice of Prescribed Authority vide affidavit dated 20th November, 1998 filed by one Ravindra Nath Tandon, son of Late R.N.Tandon on behalf of the petitioner. The subsequently sale deed dated 17th April, 1998 (which is on record as Annexure 16A to the writ petition), was actually executed in favour of respondents No.5 to 10 by respondents No.1 to 4.

7. The Trial Court considered application and dismissed the same vide judgment dated 23rd January, 1999 observing that neither there was any compliance of Rule 17 of Uttar Pradesh Urban Buildings (Regulation of Letting, Rent and Eviction) Rules, 1972 (hereinafter referred to as "Rules, 1972") nor respondents No.1 to 4 could prove that disputed accommodation is in dilapidated condition. The mere fact that accommodation constituted a part of an old building necessarily would not result in rendering the entire building in dilapidated condition. It also disbelieved report of Engineer submitted by respondents No.1 to 4 observing that in a very careless manner it was prepared mentioning therein life of building being 150 years though in the sale deed dated 29th November, 1982, whereby respondents No.1 to 4 had purchased the accommodation in question from Sri Om

Click Here to Read the rest of this document