RAJESHWARI DEVI Vs. IST ADDITIONAL DISTRICT JUDGE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner is the landlady of the shop in question, which has been let out to respondent No. 3. The petitioner filed a suit for eviction of respondent No. 3 on the ground of default in the payment of rent and also on the ground that a portion of the shop had been sublet to one Jagan Nath, who was running a pan shop from a portion of the premises in question. During the pendency of the suit Sri Jagan Nath died and his heirs were arrayed as respondent Nos. 4 and 5.

(2.) The defendant respondent No. 3 contested the suit and contended that he had not committed any default in the payment of rent nor had sublet the shop to Jagan Nath. The respondent No. 3 stated that Jagan Nath was running a pan shop outside the shop on the road and no portion of the shop had been let out to Jagan Nath.

(3.) The trial court after determining the points in issue held that the respondent No. 3 did not commit any default in the payment of rent. The trial court, however, found that the respondent No. 3 had sub-let the shop in question to Jagan Nath and since Jagan Nath was not related to respondent No. 3, therefore, the suit was decreed on the ground of subletting. The trial court found that since the summons sent by the Court to Jagan Nath at the address of the shop was received by him, therefore, the Court came to a conclusion that a portion of the shop was sublet by the tenant to Sri Jagan Nath.