Thereafter, the pro ceedings were initiated in 1974.
It is also number in dispute that the married daughters never participated, number claimed interest in the business companyducted by Bhole Nath.
The only question that arises in this case is whether the married daughters of the deceased tenant are necessary parties and that number impleading them would disentitle the landlady to maintain the action for ejectment.
Admittedly, Lalu the original tenant died in 15.
The prescribed authority and the Appellate Tribunal found as a fact that the appellant required the premises bona fide to start the business.
From the Judgment and Order dated 12.5.1982 of the Allahabad High Court in Civil Misc.
55, Thatheri Bazar, Allahabad on payment of Rs.
40/ per month as rent including electric charges.
It is also an admitted fact that even before the death of the father they were married and they are living with their husbands elsewhere.
Till then, one of the sons of Lalu, namely, Bhole Nath was in occupation of the premises and did carry on business as admitted by him in affidavit Exhibit SA II that the deponent is the tenant of a portion of house No.
129 of 1986.
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION Civil Appeal No.
Writ Petition No.
13431 of 1981.
K. Srivastava for the Respondents.
The following Order of the Court was delivered This appeal by special leave has been filed by the landlady.
She laid action under s.21 of the U.P. Urban Building Regulation of letting, rent and eviction Act, 1972 for short the Act for eviction of the tenant on the ground of bona fide requirement to start business by her son.
D. Agarwal and Indeever Goodwill for the appellant.
But the High Court allowed the writ petition, set aside the order on the sole ground that the married daughters of the original tenant, Lalu were number impleaded who are the necessary parties and, therefore, the number joinder of the necessary parties disentitle the landlady to have the ejectment of the tenants namely the sons and the widow of the deceased tenant Lalu.
