BHAGIRTHI DEVI Vs. PREM NATH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The short question for decision in this second appeal against order is whether the doctrine of suspension of rent will apply against the appellant-landlady by reason of her taking possession of a part of the demised premises from one of several tenants alone without the consent of the other tenants. The Rent Control Tribunal differing from the Additional Rent Controller found against the appellant.

(2.) The brief facts are that in 1949 the appellant-landlady let out two flats in the first floor of the building bearing Municipal No. VI/4918, Sham Lal Road (7B Darya Ganj) Delhi jointly to five persons, including Lalta Parshad. The lessees were the father and four brothers. Each flat consisted of three room with Barsati, latrine and roof thereon. The total monthly rent was Rs. 150.00. The landlady filed an eviction petition against all the five tenants staling that she required the same for her bonafide requirement; this was in addition to her relying on other grounds as well. The said application dated 25th September 1963 seems to have been presented to the Court on 3rd October 1963. It was further stated in the eviction petition that the father Lakshmi Narain (respondent No. 1) had renounced the world and had became an ascetic more than six months prior to the petition. Another brother Om Parkash (respondent No. 3) had shifted his residence to another property (84 Darya Ganj) said to belong to the family of the brothers about a year prior to the petition. Yet 1

(3.) The short question for decision in this second appeal against order is whether the doctrine of suspension of rent will apply against the appellant-landlady by reason of her taking possession of a part of the demised premises from one of several tenants alone without the consent of the other tenants. The Rent Control Tribunal differing from the Additional Rent Controller found against the appellant.