JUDGMENT Hon’ble S.U. Khan, J.—This writ petition was filed by the tenants. It arose out proceedings for eviction initiated by landlord respondent under Section 21(1)(b) of U.P. Act No. 13 of 1972 for release on the ground of dilapidated condition of the building. Property in dispute was a shop. Release application was allowed by the Prescribed Authority. Appeal was dismissed by the lower appellate Court. While deciding the writ petition on 29.8.2007 after maintaining order of eviction of the Courts below I issued following directions: “Accordingly, it is directed that tenants shall deliver possession to the landlord within two months from the date on which information/notice regarding passing of the map of the complex is given to the tenants. The information shall be given in writing by the learned counsel for the landlord in this Court to the learned counsel for the tenants petitioners. Alongwith information photocopy of the map and relevant orders regarding passing of the map must also been supplied. Within six months from getting possession landlord shall reconstruct so much of the complex that one shop in the said complex is handed over to the tenants within six months from the date on which possession is delivered by the tenants to the landlord. The dimensions /area of newly constructed shop shall be almost same as dimensions/area of the existing shop. The tentative rent of the newly constructed shop shall be Rs. 1000/- per month. However, any of the parties is at liberty to apply before the prescribed authority for payment of proper rent. If such an application is filed then prescribed authority shall decide exact cost of the construction of the new shop and 1/120 thereof shall be fixed by the prescribed authority as monthly rent of the newly constructed shop. Until fixation of rent by the prescribed authority tenant shall pay rent to the landlord @ Rs. 1000/- per month (against existing rent of Rs. 150/- per month). It is further directed that in case within six months from taking possession, landlord does not complete reconstruction and handover newly constructed shop to the tenant then since after expiry of six months from taking possession till new construction and delivery of newly constructed shop to the tenants landlord shall pay damages to the tenant @ Rs. 1000/- per month. It is further directed that in case within six months from taking possession, landlord does not complete reconstruction and handover newly constructed shop to the tenant then since after expiry of six months from taking possession till new construction and delivery of newly constructed shop to the tenants landlord shall pay damages to the tenant @ Rs. 1000/- per month. However, in case construction is not completed within a year from taking possession of the shop by the tenant then damages will be paid @ Rs. 2000/- per month by the landlord to the tenants since after one year till the newly constructed shop is delivered to the tenant. This direction is being issued in view of the authority of Supreme Court reported in S.J. Abbas v. Mohd Yamin, AIR 2004 SC 3683 .” 2. Thereafter, through notice dated 5.10.2007 information of passing of map on 28.9.2007 was given to the counsel of the tenants. On expiry of two months therefrom the shop was not vacated hence application was filed by the landlord before the Prescribed Authority. Thereupon the possession was delivered to the landlord through police force on 25.1.2008. The landlord instead of getting the new complex constructed got a new map passed on 27.12.2008 and gave the information of the same to the tenant. 3. Thereafter, on 18.6.2010 landlord gave letter to the tenants stating that one shop (newly constructed) is being kept ready by the landlord for him of which he (the tenant) is not taking possession and that he must at once occupy the same. 4. Meanwhile landlord was sending drafts of the amount of Rs. 1000/- per month and of Rs. 2000/- per month, after six months of getting possession, to the tenants. Alongwith letter dated 29.10.2009 amount for October and November, 2009 was remitted and tenant was asked asking to take possession of one shop till the end of November, 2009. Another letter was sent on 24.11.2009. Rs. 2000/- for December, 2009 were sent through money order. 5. However, the new shop was being offered on first floor hence tenant refused to accept the same. 6. Amount at the rate of Rs. 2000/- per month was sent till June, 2011 as mentioned in the modification application filed on 27.5.2011. 7. Another letter was sent on 24.11.2009. Rs. 2000/- for December, 2009 were sent through money order. 5. However, the new shop was being offered on first floor hence tenant refused to accept the same. 6. Amount at the rate of Rs. 2000/- per month was sent till June, 2011 as mentioned in the modification application filed on 27.5.2011. 7. In the counter-affidavit it has been stated that landlord dishonestly did not construct as per map sanctioned on 28.9.2007 and got an altogether different map passed on 27.12.2008 i.e. after fifteen months. The tenants gave a notice demanding new shop on 9.7.2008. Tenants filed Contempt Petition No. 2509 of 2009. Thereafter, landlord started paying the amount. In paras-15 and 16 of the counter-affidavit, it has been stated that the shop which is being offered on first floor (7' x 12') is not suitable for the tenant as they are to carry on business of selling arms and ammunitions and that area of old shop in possession of the tenant was 8.5 x 17'. 8. During arguments learned counsel for the tenants clearly stated that the tenants were not ready to take the newly constructed shop of 7' x 12' on the first floor. 9. Firstly the tenants committed fault by not vacating the premises within two months of getting notice of passing of the map. Thereafter, landlord committed fault by not constructing in accordance with the first map and getting a new map passed after more than one year. Obviously the fault of the landlord is much more grievous than that of tenants. Further landlord should have offered shop of almost similar dimensions on the ground floor to the tenant. Learned counsel for landlord has argued that landlord is suffering double loss. Firstly, he is giving Rs. 2000/- per month to the tenants and secondly he is keeping one shop vacant. 10. In view of the above, now it is not possible to provide shop in new complex to the tenants. Accordingly, in my opinion the best course would be to award reasonable damages/compensation to the tenants. 11. Accordingly, modification application is allowed. Judgment and order dated 29.8.2007 is modified and it is directed that instead of giving a newly constructed shop to the tenants, the landlord shall pay Rs. 3 lacs to the tenants after adjusting the amount already paid by him. 11. Accordingly, modification application is allowed. Judgment and order dated 29.8.2007 is modified and it is directed that instead of giving a newly constructed shop to the tenants, the landlord shall pay Rs. 3 lacs to the tenants after adjusting the amount already paid by him. This will be more than adequate compensation as the rent of original old shop was only Rs. 150/- per month. The amount shall positively be paid to the tenants through draft within two months from today failing which 2% per month interest shall be payable upon the said amount. ——————