JUDGMENT Sudhir Agarwal, J. 1. Called in revised. None appeared on behalf of the petitioner to press this writ petition. Sri Sanjay Agrawal, Adocate is present for the respondents. In the circumstances, I myself have perused the record. 2. The petitioner-landlord instituted SCC Suit No.104 of 2000 for recovery of arrears of rent and ejectment of respondents-tenant from accommodation in question on the ground of default in payment of rent and sub-letting, which was dismissed vide judgment and order dated 22.11.2006 and the revision of the petitioner filed thereagainst has also been dismissed by Additional District Judge, Court No.13, Agra vide judgment dated 14.02.2007. 3. Both the Courts below have recorded concurrent findings of fact that petitioner could not prove sub letting as contemplated in Uttar Pradesh Urban Buildings (Regulation of Letting, Rent and Eviction) Act, 1972 (hereinafter referred to as "Act, 1972") as also default in payment of rent, which could not be shown perverse in any manner. 4. The scope of judicial review under Article 226/227 is very limited and narrow as discussed in detail by this Court in Writ-A No. 11365 of 1998 (Jalil Ahmad Vs. 16th Addl. Distt. Judge, Kanpur Nagar and others) decided on 30.7.2012. There is nothing which may justify judicial review of orders impugned in this writ petition in the light of exposition of law, as discussed in the above judgment. 5. In view of above, I do not find any reason to interfere with the impugned orders. 6. Dismiss. 7. Interim order, if any, stands vacated.