DAULAT RAM SAWHNEY Vs. TRILOKINATH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) IN this second appeal the following two questions have been referred by a Division Bench for the opinion of this Full Bench:

(2.) THE facts found by the first appellate court show that, in the accommodation in question which belonged to the respondent -landlord, there were some earlier tenants against whom the respondent obtained a decree for ejectment. That decree was executed. On 20th March 1950 in connection with the execution proceedings which were going on arising out of that suit an agreement was arrived at between the appellant and the respondent which was in the following terms:

(3.) THE first question is in two parts. The first part requires us to express an opinion whether there could be a valid or enforceable agreement of letting out an accommodation before an allotment order is passed in respect of the said accommodation, under the provisions of the U.P. (Temp.) Control of Rent and Eviction Act. On our interpretation of the agreement in this case, we are of the opinion that this question does not arise at all. We have held that there was no agreement of letting out any accommodation and, consequently, the question whether there could be a valid and enforceable agreement of such a nature does not arise.