In Brief
A landlord sought eviction of his tenant under the U.P. Urban Buildings Act, 1972 for commercial need. The trial court and first appellate court allowed the eviction. However, the High Court dismissed the application on the ground that it was not maintainable because the tenancy was primarily residential, not commercial. The Supreme Court held that the maintainability plea could not be raised for the first time before the High Court since it was never pleaded before the trial or appellate courts. The Court restored the lower courts' orders, emphasizing that concurrent findings of fact are binding on writ courts and cannot be interfered with unless there is jurisdictional error. The tenant was granted three months to vacate subject to payment of arrears and advance rent."
The lawyer headnote and full judgment text are available to registered users.