MAHABIR SINGH Vs. ANANT RAM

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS is a tenant's second appeal from the concurrent decisions of the Courts below decreeing the landlord's suit for his ejectment from a house. The plaintiff respondent Anant Ram is the owner of a house in Muzaffarnagar of which the defendant-appellant Mahabir Singh is the tenant. The plaintiff alleged that the appellant fell into arrears of rent for four months which he did not pay in spite of service of a notice of demand. He also alleged that the plaintiff had sub-let a portion of the house to two sub-tenants without his consent. The defendant resisted the suit and denied both allegations. He alleged that on receipt of the notice of demand he remitted the rent due by money order but the plaintiff refused to accept it and the remittance was returned by the post office with the indorsement that it had been refused. As regards the charge of subletting he admitted that the two persons mentioned in the plaint had stayed with him for sometime, but alleged that they were his quests and had gone away. Both tie Courts below have held that the appellant did not pay the arrears of rent within the statutory period of one month from the date of demand and that he had sub-let a portion of the house to Chhota, the second defendant. The trial Court ordered his ejectment and the Civil Judge dismissed his appeal. He has come to this Court in second appeal.

(2.) I have heard Mr. S.I. Hyder for the appellant and Mr. N. S. Singhal for ma respondent and also gone through the evidence. I am of opinion that the decision of the Courts below IB erroneous.

(3.) THIS appeal is allowed with costs. The decree for ejectment is set aside and the plain tiff's suit for ejectment dismissed with costs throughout. The decree for rent shall stand, but as the plaintiff refused the rent when it was tendered, he shall pay his own costs of this part of the suit throughout.