RAWAT Vs. RAM KARAM CHAND

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This petition for revision is directed against the concurrent decisions of the Rent Controller and the Appellate Authority. The only matter that survives for determination is whether the tenant has sublet the premises. No other matter, therefore, need be noticed.

(2.) The shop in dispute belongs to Rawat. According to his case he had rented it out to Karam Chand alone and it is stated that Karam Chand sublet it to Mangal Chand. The stand taken up by Karam Chand is that the shop was rented out to the joint Hindu family and it is still with the members of the joint Hindu family. The Rent Controller came to the conclusion that there was subletting. But on appeal the Appellate Authority reversed the decision of the Rent Controller and remanded the case to him for re-decision, particularly when it was not decided whether the shop had been originally let out to the joint Hindu family or Karam Chand as an individual. After remand the Rent Controller came to the conclusion that the shop had been rented out to the joint Hindu family of which Karam Chand and his brother Ram Chander were members. The plea of the landlord that there was subletting was consequently negatived. The landlord preferred an appeal to the Appellate Authority. The Appellate Authority affirmed the decision of the Rent Controller. The landlord being dissatisfied with this decision has come up in revision to this Court.

(3.) Mr. P. S. Jain, learned counsel for the landlord has urged that the decision of the Appellate Authority is not in accordance with the evidence and that material evidence has been ignored. His contention is that the evidence on the record proves that there was subletting.