Sudhir Agarwal, J.— 1. Heard Sri G.L. Tripathi, learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri Atul Dayal, learned counsel appearing for respondents. 2. This is a landlord's writ petition. He is presently residing at ground floor of House No. 95/2, Pared, Kanpur Nagar. The dispute relates to a small residential accommodation bearing Quarter No. 40, ground floor of Premises No. 12/473, Gwal Toli, Kanpur Nagar. The accommodation in which landlord was residing consists of one room measuring 8.3 ft. x 7.2 ft. having no window, almirah etc. The disputed accommodation in the possession of respondents-tenants also consists of one room measuring 13.2 ft. x 10.2 ft. The size of accommodation and other appurtenant benefits in both accommodations are more or less equally good or bad. It is in these peculiar facts and circumstances, the landlord's application filed under Section 21(1)(a) of U.P. Urban Buildings (Regulation of Letting, Rent and Eviction) Act, 1972 (hereinafter referred to as the "Act, 1972") though has succeeded before Prescribed Authority, who allowed application vide judgment and order dated 06.12.2001 but has failed before Appellate Court who has given verdict in favour of tenant vide judgment and order dated 22.05.2004. 3. Having gone through both the judgments and record, this Court viewed that this is a hard case where both parties are fighting for sustenance and betterment, wholly marginal, in the disputed accommodation. To some extent though the Appellate Court has found some benefits in accommodation where landlord is residing which are not available with dispute accommodation but the view is really not very appealing. It is in these facts and circumstances, this Court was of the view that accommodation where the landlord is presently residing, according to tenant, if is reasonably sufficient and good, having some merits, and if both parties agree, they may exchange the accommodations. Thereupon the petitioner, Hari Shankar has filed his own affidavit sworn on 22.01.2013 stating that he is ready to offer his own accommodation on the same terms and conditions of rent etc. to respondents-tenants provided they hand over vacant possession of accommodation in dispute. 4. Sri Atul Dayal, learned counsel appearing for respondents-tenants, stated at the bar that the tenants are also agree to the said offer and ready to exchange accommodation. 5. to respondents-tenants provided they hand over vacant possession of accommodation in dispute. 4. Sri Atul Dayal, learned counsel appearing for respondents-tenants, stated at the bar that the tenants are also agree to the said offer and ready to exchange accommodation. 5. In view of above statements and stand taken by both parties, this writ petition is disposed of, in modification of the judgment and order dated 22.05.2004, in the following manner: (A) The petitioner-landlord shall vacate his present accommodation, i.e., House No. 95/2, Paradi, Kanpur Nagar and handover the same to respondents-tenants in lieu of accommodation, i.e., Quarter No. 40, Premises No. 12/473, Gwal Toli, Kanpur Nagar which shall simultaneously be vacated and handed over to the petitioner by respondents-tenants. (B) This exchange shall be made by parties within one month from today, under the supervision of Prescribed Authority. (C) The present rate of rent etc. will remain same. This aspect however shall not confine or restrain or deprive landlord from taking such proceedings as permissible in law or entering into a fresh agreement, with tenants, with respect to enhancement or revision of rent etc. 6. No costs. ___________