Vinay Kumar and ors. Vs. Distt. Judge, Ghazipur and ors. - Court Judgment |
| Tenancy |
| Supreme Court of India |
| Jan-05-1994 |
| S. Mohan and; M.K. Mukherjee, JJ. |
| 1995Supp(2)SCC586 |
| U.P. Act - Section 21(1)(b) |
| Vinay Kumar and ors. |
| Distt. Judge, Ghazipur and ors. |
- order 1. the application of the respondent under section 21(1)(b) of the u.p. act was allowed by the trial court. on appeal one of the contentions was whether the son of the landlord was in government service as a doctor and yet whether he desired to set up a private clinic after resigning the government service. to this the tenant had filed a counter. this affidavit was taken on file and on that basis the order of eviction was affirmed. the writ petition filed before the high court by the tenant also suffered the same fate. 2. the only point urged before us in this civil appeal is that the son of the respondent/landlord is in government service and, therefore, he cannot have any bona fide need to start his private clinic. we are unable to agree. he has offered to resign through the affidavit that is on the record to show his intention to start a private clinic. there are no merits in this civil appeal which is dismissed. no costs.
ORDER
1. The application of the respondent under Section 21(1)(b) of the U.P. Act was allowed by the trial court. On appeal one of the contentions was whether the son of the landlord was in government service as a doctor and yet whether he desired to set up a private clinic after resigning the government service. To this the tenant had filed a counter. This affidavit was taken on file and on that basis the order of eviction was affirmed. The writ petition filed before the High Court by the tenant also suffered the same fate.
2. The only point urged before us in this civil appeal is that the son of the respondent/landlord is in government service and, therefore, he cannot have any bona fide need to start his private clinic. We are unable to agree. He has offered to resign through the affidavit that is on the record to show his intention to start a private clinic. There are no merits in this civil appeal which is dismissed. No costs.