DES RAJ Vs. SHAM LAL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Whether the identification of a demised premises as shop in the lease-deed, which otherwise is silent in regard to the purpose, per se spells out the purpose for which the premises in question is leased out or not is the legal question of some significance that arises for determination in this referred civil revision petition.

(2.) The facts concurrently found by the two Courts below and which have a bearing upon the appreciation of the question posed can be stated thus:

(3.) The respondent, hereinafter referred to as the landlord, leased out the premises which were described as 'Ek Addad Dukan (one shop)......' to the petitioner-tenant, hereinafter referred to as the tenant. The landlord sued out for the ejectment of the tenant on the ground of the change of user of the shop alleging that the shop was being used as 'godown' which tantamounted to the change of the user. Both the Courts below have found that the shop in question was being used for storing bags of grain and boxes of tea and no business, wholesale or retail, was transacted by the tenant in that shop. It deserves highlighting at the outset that these findings of fact have not been assailed before us.