RAJINDER KUMAR Vs. OM PARKASH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The question of law raised in this second appeal against the judgment and decree of the learned Additional District Judge, Ambala, dated July 24, 1979, stands concluded by my earlier judgment in Mohan Lal v. Ram Dass and others, 1977 1 RCJ 756, which was confirmed, on appeal, by the Letters Patent Bench in Letters Patent Appeal No. 72 of 1977, decided on December 4, 1979.

(2.) The suit giving rise to this appeal was filed by the respondent-owners of the property in dispute, for its possession on the ground that Ved Parkash tenant, father of the appellants, having died on January 7, 1969, the tenancy had come to an end and the appellants had no right to continue in its possession. The trial Court and the lower Appellate Court both took the view that Ved Parkash being a statutory tenant, on his death the tenancy right did not devolve on his heirs. This view was based on a decision of the Supreme Court in Anand Nivas Private Ltd. v. Anandji Kalyaniji Padhi and others, 1965 AIR(SC) 414However, in a later case Damadilal and others v. Parashram and others, 1976 RCJ 717, a different view was taken and it was ruled as under :

(3.) After taking into consideration the later decision I had held in Mohan Lal's case that the statutory tenant had a heritable interest in the premises which had been leased to him and that being so the rights of the statutory tenant in the demised premises do not come to an end on his death but devolve on his heirs. The view taken by the Courts below therefore cannot be sustained and the appellants being tenants, the suit for their ejectment in the Civil Court would not be competent.