BABUBHAI JUGALKISHOR Vs. JAICHAND JAYANTILAL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This Civil Revision Application, with the consent of the learned Counsel for the parties, is being disposed of finally at the admission stage.

(2.) Brief facts giving rise to this revision are - that the respondent had let out the disputed shop to the revisionist in individual capacity for running a shop. It was alleged that the defendant had sub-let, assigned or transferred the demised premises illegally without consent of the landlord and is not using the shop for running his business.

(3.) The suit was resisted by the revisionist on the ground that one Pramukhbhai Ranchhodbhai Patel, owner of Shree Watch Company is a tenant-in-possession of the shop in dispute and since he has not been impleaded in the suit, the suit is bad for non-joinder of necessary parties. It was pleaded that for the last several years the business was carried on in the name and style of Shree Watch Company in suit premises. It was a partnership firm in which the defendant was a partner and rent was paid and receipts were also issued in the name of Shree Watch Company. Since 1977 the defendant-revisionist and Pramukhbhai Patel were doing business in partnership and the said partnership was dissolved in the year 1983 whereafter Pramukhbhai Ranchhodbhai Patel became sole owner of the business and as such the defendant-revisionist had nothing to do with the plaintiff and the plaintiff knew about it but he never raised any objection. On these facts it was pleaded that no decree for eviction or arrears of rent can be passed against the revisionist.