(1.) The core question in this petition is whether the petitioner acquired any right of tenancy.
(2.) Briefly stated the facts are that Smt. Satyawati Jain, the predecessor in Interest of respondent No. 1, filed Suit No. 44 of 1982 in the Court of Judge Small Causes for recovery of arrears of rent, ejectment and damages against Smt. Shila Devi, Anand Kumar and Yogendra Kumar Jain (petitioner herein) with the allegations that the first and second floor portion of premises No, 76/578. Kuli Bazar, Kanpur. was let out to defendant Nos. 1 and 2 for their residence. They constructed their own house No. 6/38. Purana Kanpur and shifted there with bag and baggage and thereafter illegally sublet the disputed accommodation to Yogendra Kumar Jain, defendant No. 3. The plaintiff sent a composite notice dated October 11, 1981, demanding arrears of rent and terminating their tenancy which was served on the defendant Nos. 1 and 2 on 15.10.1981 but they did not comply with the notice. It was alleged that the petitioner-defendant No. 3 was in unauthorised occupation.
(3.) The defendant No. 1 filed written statement. It was stated that house No. 6/38, Purana Kanpur. was not constructed by the defendant Nos. 1 and 2 but was purchased by them in the year 1960. It was denied that they had sublet the accommodation to Yogendra Kumar Jain or any other person. The Firm M/s. Pyare Lal Hazarl Lal was the tenant of the accommodation and later on It was converted into a partnership firm. Sri Yogendra Kumar Jain and Shanti Devi were not sub-tenants of the defendants, Yogendra Kumar Jain, the petitioner, did not file any written statement. He had. however, filed an affidavit as pairokar of defendant No. 2. The trial court framed the following issue :