BHAGAT RAM Vs. KESHAB DEO

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS appeal has come to the Division Bench on a reference by a Single Judge and has been filed on behalf of the Defendants. Plaintiff -Respondent brought n suit for ejectment of the Defendants from two rooms over live lechers of land comprised In dag No. 592 of Kheraj Periodic Patta No. 431 situated in Fancy Bazar, Gauhatl Town. The facts are that the Plaintiff took a lease of a plot of land measuring; 151 lechas comprised in dag No. 692 of the Kheraj Periodic Patta No. 431 with a four -roofed C.I. sheet house thereon from Mustt. Jubeda Khatun and Md. Imamuddin who were arrayed as pro forma defendants Nos. 3 and 4 respectively, for a period of eleven years with effect from the 12th January 1951 at a monthly rent of Rs. 220/ - under a registered deed of lease. Defendant No. 1 Bhagat Ran urahmin and Defendant No. 2 Jagannath Brahmin. were hi occupation of the two rooms of the said house and according to the Plaintiff they were tenants -at -will under the pro forma Defendants Nos. 3 and 4 on a monthly rent of Rs. 110/ -. In the lease it was agreed between the Plaintiff and the pro forma Defendants that the Plaintiff would demolish the old existing house on the land and would erect a new two or three storied building thereon and would pay rent at the rate of Ks. 000/ -per month to the pro forma Defendants after construction of the house. The Plaintiff was) authorised under the lease to realise the monthly rent from the principal Defendants 1 and 2 and to take necessary steps for their ejectment. Half the cost of the suit for ejectment was to be borne by the Defendant Nos. 3 and 4.

(2.) THE trial court decreed the suit for ejectment but refused to pass a decree for compensation and arrear rent. On appeal by the. Defendants the decree of the trial Court was armed. The parties were directed to bear their own costs.

(3.) IN our opinion there is no substance in tile contention of the Appellants that the lessors could not execute a second lease in favour of the plain -tiff during the subsistence of the first lease. Section 100 of the Transfer of Property Act provides that if the lessor transfers the property leased, or any part thereof, or any part of his interest there -in, the transferee, in the absence of a contract to the contrary, shall possess all the rights, and, if the lessee so elects, be subject to all the liabilities of the lessor as to the property or part transferred so long as he is the owner of it; but the lessor shall not, by reason only of such transfer, cease to be subject to any of the liabilities imposed upon him by the lease, unless the lessee elects to treat the transferee as the person liable to him. Under the section even the transfer of a part of a lessors interest is permissible and on the said transfer the reversionary right vests in the transferee. A lease is a transfer of a part of the interest of the lessor in the property.