S RAJDEV SINGH Vs. ROYAL STUDIOS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The appellant landlord failed both before the Controller and in the first appeal before the Rent Control Tribunal to obtain an order of eviction against the respondents on the ground that the tenants Respondents 1 to 3 have sublet, assigned or otherwise parted with the possession of a part of the premises to Respondent No. 4, their sub-tenant, within the meaning of proviso (b) to Section 14 (1) of the Delhi Rent Control Act, 1958 (hereinafter called the Act) which runs as follows:

(2.) The reasons why the application for eviction was dismissed by the Controller and the dismissal was upheld by the Bent Control Tribunal in the first appeal were as follows:

(3.) Hence this second appeal by the landlord under Section 39 of the Act. The landlord has challenged the correctness of both the reasons given above for the dismissal of his application for eviction of the respondents. Let us, therefore, re-examine their correctness.