L. LAKSHMI NARAIN Vs. SRI KRISHNA AND ANOTHER

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The question which arises for consideration in this appeal is whether the tenant in chief Sri Kishan has sublet the premises.

(2.) It appears that the owner of the house, a part of which is alleged to have been sublet, was one Lakshmi Narain. He granted lease to Piarelal who is the father of Sri Krishna. One Basdeo is the uncle of Sri Krishna. Sri Krishna and Basdeo were living in the house when it is alleged they sublet a room thereof to Dharam Das. It appears also that the allegation is that Dharamdas had the use of a Baithak as well.

(3.) The landlord sued to eject the tenant and he claimed that, by virtue of the subletting, the disability which is otherwise imposed by S. 3 of the UP (Temporary) Control of Rent and Eviction Act on landlords seeking to eject had been removed. The defence on this point was that there had been no subletting but that Dharamdas had only been allowed to live in a portion of the house with a view that he may look after and watch the things kept in the locked portion of the house. The question is whether there has been subletting of the house to Dharamdas.