SHASHI JAIN Vs. TARSEM LAL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This appeal by special leave has been filed by Smt. Shashi Jain-landlady, assailing the final judgment and order dated 23.04.1998 passed by the High Court of Punjab and Haryana at Chandigarh in Civil Revision No. 4062 of 1997.

(2.) The facts in brief giving rise to this appeal are as follows : On 24.07.1961, the mother of Smt. Shashi Jain-landlady-appellant (hereinafter referred to as the "landlady") had inducted Tarsem Lal as a tenant in the premises, i.e. House No. 971, Block-1 consisting of three rooms, one verandah, attached courtyard, open space and latrine, etc. situated on Rajpura Road, Civil Lines, Ludhiana, on a monthly rent of Rs. 30/- vide written rent deed (Ex.-AW5/A). On 12.11.1973, Khushi Ram had submitted application Form D-1 in the office of the Civil Supply Officer for getting ration card to his family members namely Smt. Lajwanti wife, Tarsem Lal, Janak Raj, Harbans Lal, Kewal Krishansons and Avinash Kumari daughter-in-law who all were living together in the demised premises on 01.04.1970, mother of the landlady suffered a consent decree of the court in regard to the demised premises jointly passed in favour of the landlady and her brother. Because of non-registration of the said decree, ownership rights could not be transferred in the name of the landlady and her brother. On 14.03.1974, the mother of the landlady preferred an application for ejectment of Tarsem Lal-tenant on the ground of arrears of rent w.e.f. April, 1973 to May, 1974, which amount later on was tendered by the tenant in the court. Again on 01.10.1974, the mother of the landlady had filed second application for ejectment of the tenant for non-payment of rent from June, 1974 to October, 1974.

(3.) It was the case of the landlady before the Rent Controller that the tenant did not tender the arrears of rent as claimed. The Rent Controller, Ludhiana, passed an ejectment order against the tenant. On appeal, the First Appellate Authority set aside the said order and held that since the landlady and her brother had already become the landlords of the demised premises, therefore, Tarsem Lal has to be held a tenant under them. The order of the First Appellate Authority was upheld by the High Court of Punjab and Haryana on 11.04.1980. The special leave petition preferred against the order of the High Court came to be dismissed by this Court.