Back
SALIL KUMAR RAI
Sharad Sahu – Appellant
Versus
Saurabh Saha – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
Hon'ble Salil Kumar Rai, J.
The above-mentioned writ petitions were connected by different orders of this Court and have been heard together and are being decided by a common judgment.
2. The writ petitions have been filed by tenants and arise out of orders of release passed in proceedings under Section 21(1)(a) of Uttar Pradesh Urban Buildings (Regulation of Letting, Rent and Eviction) Act, 1972 (hereinafter referred to as, 'Act, 1972'). The petitioner in Writ - A Nos. 15284 of 2017 and 15287 of 2017 and the petitioner in Writ - A Nos. 17499 of 2017 and 17502 of 2017 are brothers. The premises involved in the present petitions are shops and northern part of House No. 52/43-A at Nai Dal Mandi, Kanpur Nagar. There are roads approximately 30 ft. to 40 ft. wide on the east, west and northern side of the building. Parts of the building were also let out to three other tenants, namely, Ashok Kumar Gupta, Rajiv Gupta and Om Prakash Rathore. The dimensions of the shop let out to the petitioner in Writ - A Nos. 15284 of 2017 and 15287 of 2017 are 9.6 ft. x 29 ft. and the dimensions of the shop let out to the petitioner in Writ - A Nos. 17499 of 2017 and 17502 of 2017 is 7.9 ft. x 2
The court established that a landlord's bona fide need for their property does not require absolute necessity, and long-term tenancy does not preclude eviction if the landlord's need is genuine.
The landlord's need for release of premises cannot be dictated by the tenant, and the landlord is the best judge of his need. The court cannot advise the landlord on how to carry out his business or ....
The landlord is the best judge of his requirement and the tenant cannot dictate the landlord as to how and in what manner he should live. The availability of other vacant shops, as pleaded by the ten....
The landlord's need for release should be judged disparately, and the tenant cannot question and compel a landlord to live in a particular manner. The landlord is the best judge of his residential re....
The concept of bona fide need requires a genuine desire for premises, and the landlord's choice of accommodation should be respected by the court.
Point of Law : It is required on the part of petitioner to search accommodation after filing the release application and in the present case there is no dispute that the petitioner had never made any....
The landlord's bona fide need for premises cannot be questioned by the tenant regarding alternative accommodation; the landlord is the sole arbiter of his needs.
The bona fide need of a landlord for eviction under the Uttar Pradesh Urban Buildings Act is a factual determination that should not be interfered with by the courts, and tenants cannot dictate the m....
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
