x 26 ft.
The suit was registered as petition No.6/2000 before the Prescribed Authority.
The appellant herein instituted the petition under Section 21 1 a of U.P. Urban Buildings Regulation of Letting, Rent and Eviction Act, 1972 hereinafter referred to as the Rent Act for short against the predecessor of the respondents herein seeking release of the premises bearing No.83/72A, Tiwari Gali, Chhatta Bazar, Mathura.
Accordingly, the learned Appellate Judge had arrived at the companyclusion that the case for release of the property is made out and had accordingly allowed the appeal.
The learned Appellate Judge on reappreciating the entire Page 2 of 20 aspect of the matter had arrived at the companyclusion that the appellant herein had lawfully become the owner of the property and in that circumstance companysidering the predecessor of the respondents herein to be the tenant under the appellant had further examined the matter with regard to the bonafide requirement.
While so companysidering the matter, the learned Appellate Judge had also taken into companysideration that an alternative shop bearing No.83/9C situated at Chhatta Bazar, Mathura measuring 2.5 ft.
Through the said order the High Court has allowed the Writ Petition filed by the respondents herein and has set aside the judgment and order dated 09.10.2007 passed by the Special Judge, Mathura in P.A. Appeal No.1/2002 whereby the order dated 03.08.2001 passed by the Prescribed Signature Not Verified Digitally signed by MAHABIR SINGH Date 2019.11.15 162824 IST Reason Page 1 of 20 Authority Upper Civil Judge C.D. is upheld.
Hence the learned Single Judge has also taken a similar view as arrived at by the Prescribed Authority learned Upper Civil Judge and in that light has reversed the judgment passed by the Appellate Court.
The appellant, therefore, claiming to be aggrieved is before this Court in this appeal.
The appellant is, therefore, aggrieved and is before this Court.
The appellant claiming to be aggrieved by the same had filed the appeal in P.A. Appeal No.1/2002 before the Appellate Authority, namely, the Special Judge, Mathura.
S. Bopanna,J. The appellant is before this Court assailing the order dated 28.11.2007 passed by the High Court of Judicature at Allahabad in Civil Misc.
Writ Petition No.54204/2007.
The Prescribed Authority having taken into companysideration the rival companytentions, on holding that the appellant herein cannot claim ownership right over the companyarcenary property and in that light on arriving at the companyclusion that the appellant is number the landlord of the respondents and also holding that the bonafide requirement does number exist, had dismissed the petition declining the release of the shop premises in question.
