IMPORTANT POINT
The court established that a landlord's bona fide need for premises must be genuine, and the existence of alternate accommodations must be evaluated in context.

JUDGMENT :

Ashutosh Srivastava, J.

1. All the above referred writ petitions involve identical questions of law and facts. The Writ Petition (A) No. 1597 of 2024 is being treated as the leading writ petition and the facts pertaining to the same is being considered for deciding the controversy involved.

2. Heard Shri Rishikesh Tripathi, learned counsel for the petitioner and Shri Rahul Agarwal, learned counsel for the caveator/respondent.

3. The instant writ petition, at the instance of the tenant/petitioner, has been filed assailing the judgment and order dated 6.1.2024 passed by the learned Additional District Judge, Banda in Rent Control Appeal No. 8 of 2022 as also the judgment and order dated 24.5.2022 passed by the learned Prescribed Authority/Civil Judge (Sr.Div.), Banda in Rent Case No. 5 of 2018 (Ravi Kul Bansal v. Gauri Shankar Prajapati).

4. By the judgment and order dated 24.5.2022, the learned Prescribed Authority allowed the release application under Section 21 (1) (a) of U.P. Act No. 13 of 1972. By the judgment and order dated 6.1.2024, the Appellate Authority has dismissed the Rent Appeal and upheld the judgment and order of the Prescribed Authority dated 24.5.2022.

5. The facts shorn of unnecessary details giving rise to the controversy involved between the parties are that the petitioner is a tenant in a shop @ Rs. 500/- per month and is doing hardware business. The respondent is the landlord. A release application under Section 21 (1) (a) of the U.P. Act No. 13 of 1972 was filed by the respondent/landlord against the tenant/petitioner setting up a bona fide need of the premises under the tenancy of the petitioner for his son Anshul Bansal for installing a digital printing press, which will require an area of 2100 square feet. The business of digital printing press involves setting up of Colour Printing Machines, Paper Cutting Machines, Perfect Binding Machines, Book Binding Machines, Punching and Creasing Machine besides numerous computers. It was alleged that the landlord has got 2086 square feet area in his possession i.e. area in which the shop under the tenancy of the petitioner and other tenants is situate which is best suited for setting up the printing press.

6. The release application was contested by the tenant/petitioner by filing written statement stating inter alia that the landlord/respondent is a man of means possessed of about 35 shops and 10 to 15 suits have been filed for eviction of the tenants. The tenant/petitioner filed evidence in the form of an affidavit stating that the landlord/respondent has alternate accommodation to cater to his need. He also filed photographs of the vacant shops and also got issued Amin Commission.

7. The learned Prescribed Authority vide its judgment and order dated 24.5.2022 allowed the release application returning the finding of bona fide need in favour of the landlord/respondent and against the tenant/petitioner. The finding on the question of comparative hardship was also recorded in favour of the landlord/respondent and against the tenant/petitioner.

8. The tenant/petitioner assailed the order of the learned Prescribed Authority in rent appeal. During the pendency of the appeal, the tenant/petitioner came to know that some shops have come in possession of the landlord/respondent, which would satisfy the need set up and such information was sought to be brought on record by filing an application for adducing additional evidence under Order 41 Rule 27 CPC. The judgment in SCC Case No. 7 of 2015, judgment in SCC Case No. 3 of 2001, judgment in SCC Case No. 1 of 2005 and judgment in Case No. 2 of 2015 were brought on record to demonstrate that the subject-matter of the SCC Suits decreed in favour of the landlord/respondent were in his possession. The premises released were two compounds in possession of Assistant Commissioner, Commercial Tax, one shop of tenant Mahboob Khan, one shop in possession of tenant Smt. Kamla Devi, one shop of Moti Lal Richhariya. The applicatio