Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC-LKO:25164 Court No. - 6 Case :- WRIT - A No. - 1000187 of 2007 Petitioner :- Narendra Kumar Duggal Respondent :- Additional District Judge/ Special Judge E.C. Act Lko. Counsel for Petitioner :- Mohd. Adil Khan Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Arvind Kumar Jauhari,Jai Prakash Mathur Hon'ble Pankaj Bhatia,J. 1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner 2. None has appeared for the respondent despite the matter being taken up in the revised list. 3. From perusal of the record, it is clear that a release application was filed by the petitioner under Section 21(1)(a) of U.P. Act No.13 of 1972 pleading bonafide need which was allowed vide order dated 12.05.2004. Against the said order, the tenant preferred an appeal. The said appeal has been allowed by the appellate Court vide order dated 02.08.2007 holding that in case the appellant was to be dispossessed it would cause irreparable hardship. The appellate Court did not believe the contention of the petitioner that he was living in Bombay and the weather of Bombay was not conducive and he wanted to shift. 4. In the entire order, no reasoning has been recorded based upon which the findings of bonafide need as held by the prescribed authority was set aside. 5. Considering the fact that the appellate order is bereft of any reasoning coupled with the fact that respondent no.2 is a company incorporated under the Companies Act, the impugned order dated 02.08.2007 cannot is sustained and is quashed. 6. Order dated 12.05.2004 passed by the prescribed authority is confirmed. 7. In case the respondent has not vacated the premises, the execution shall be taken and shall be concluded within six months. 8. Present petition stands allowed in above terms. Order Date :- 1.5.2025 nishant Digitally signed by :- NISHANT MOHAN High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench