NIVRUTI RAMCHANDRA AHERRAO Vs. VIVEK BABURAO DEOLE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) RULE . By consent of the parties made returnable forthwith. Heard finally.

(2.) THIS is a tenant's petition filed under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, challenging the orders of the Courts below. The petitioner claims to be tenant of the suit premises. It is the case of the landlord that it is only petitioner no.1, who is the tenant of the concerned suit premises and that the petitioner no.2 is not the tenant of the suit premises. According to the landlord, the petitioner no.1 has sublet the premises to the petitioner no.2. Both the courts below have decreed the suit on the ground of subletting. The findings recorded by the both Courts below, are based on material on record and those are concurrent findings of fact. The Appellate Court has, after referring to the evidence on record, held that in 1968 the petitioner no.2 set up his independent business and therefore, it cannot be said that from 1959-60, when the tenancy commenced, the petitioners were joint family and both of them were tenant. The finding recorded by the Courts below that the petitioner no.1 has sublet the suit premises is based on the evidence on record and on the statement made by the petitioners themselves. Therefore, the orders of the Courts below do not require any interference at the hands of this Court in view of the law laid down by the Supreme Court in its judgment in Harbans Lal Vs. Jagmohan Saran (1985) 4 Supreme Court Cases 333.