Point of Law - If the heirs and LRs of the landlord have a case of bona fide need as aforesaid, they would be free to pursue it by instituting appropriate proceedings before the Prescribed Authority or other Court of competent jurisdiction.

JUDGMENT :

1. This writ petition is directed against concurrent refusal of an application for release under Section 21(1)(a) of The Uttar Pradesh Urban Buildings (Regulation of Letting, Rent and Eviction) Act, 1972 (U.P. Act No. 13 of 1972) (for short 'the Act') by both the Courts below.

2. An application for release was moved under Section 21(1)(a) of the Act by Anil Kumar Singh, seeking release of House No. 167, situate at Mohalla Sarai Thok Purvi, Pargana Bangar, Tehsil and District Hardoi that was in the tenancy occupation of Brijendra Pal Singh. The release application was registered on the file of the Prescribed Authority/Civil Judge, Hardoi as P.A. Case No. 11 of 1989. This application was instituted way back in the month of August, 1989 before the Prescribed Authority by Anil Kumar Singh alone, setting up a case of bona fide need and comparative hardship in his favour. Later on, Anil kumar Singh's father Surendra Pal Singh was also impleaded as a co-applicant, applicant no. 2 to the application, in order to obviate certain objections that Brijendra Pal Singh raised about the right of Anil Kumar Singh to maintain the proceedings on ground that it was Anil Kumar Singh's father who was the landlord and not Anil Kumar Singh.

3. Anil Kumar Singh passed away pending this petition and his heirs and LRs, to wit, Shitanshu Singh Parmar and Priyanshu Singh Parmar have been brought on record as petitioners nos. 1/1 and 1/2. Anil Kumar Singh and his heirs and LRs shall hereinafter be referred to as 'the landlord', unless the context requires an individual reference. Brijendra Pal Singh, tenant, also passed away pending this petition and his heirs and LRs too have been brought on record. They are four in number and arrayed as respondent nos. 3/1, 3/2, 3/3 and 3/4 to this petition. Brijendra Pal Singh shall hereinafter be referred to as 'the tenant' which would include reference to his heirs and LRs, unless the context otherwise requires. In the latter case, the tenant concerned shall be referred to by name.

4. The landlord came up with a case in his application for release that House No. 161, situate at Mohalla Sarai Thok Purvi, Pargana Bangar, Tehsil & District Hardoi (for short 'the demised premises') is a property of the landlord, his father Surendra Pal Singh and brothers, who constitute a Joint Hindu Family. The landlord's father was the Karta of the Joint Hindu Family and the tenant was in occupation of the demised premises that were let out by the landlord's father at a monthly rent of Rs. 20/-. There was a partition of the joint family and its properties where the demised premises had fallen to the landlord's share. The partition was brought about on 10.05.1989 through a family settlement. According to the family settlement, the landlord had become the owner of the demised premises and, therefore, its landlord vis-a-vis the tenant. The fact of this family settlement is well within the tenant's knowledge. The landlord's father, Surendra Pal Singh had permitted him to reside in a part of his house on condition that he could stay there until time that amicably or by taking recourse to legal proceedings, he got the demised premises vacated.

5. The landlord further pleaded that he hails from a respectable and educated family and is an Advocate practicing at the District Court, Hardoi. He is in bona fide need of the demised premises for his residence and that of his family members, besides establishing his chamber. It was also asserted by the landlord that the part of his father's house that he was occupying with the latter's permission is not sufficient for his needs and he is facing hardship. The landlord has in his family his wife, who does not get along with her mother-in-law and sisters-in-law, resulting in squabbles in the family. In turn, the landlord has to suffer the resultant tension and anxiety, which adversely impact his profession. It is also pleaded by the landlord that he apprised the tenant about the difficulties faced