RAM LAL Vs. PARSHOTAM LAL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This is a revision filed by the tenant against an order of ejectment passed by the Appellate Authority reversing that of the Rent Controller, who had dismissed the ejectment application.

(2.) The facts, which are admitted and which have come on the record are that the tenancy is based on a rent-note, Exhibit A-2, which is on a printed from filled in by Ram Lal tenant, dated 1st April, 1953. According to this as well as according to the statement of the landlord, this shop as taken for Karobar. There is no indication whatever for what Karobar the shop was taken. Though, to begin with, it was asserted by the landlord in his examination in-chief, that the tenant has opened another door on the street suggesting there-by that he did so without the consent of the landlord, yet, in cross-examination he had to admit that it was the landlord who got this door opened at the instance of the tenant, after getting the permission of the Municipal Committee. Admittedly, therefore, this shop has two doors, each opening on two different roads.

(3.) There is then the evidence of Ajit Singh A W. 3, who was produced by the landlord and who had been for 12 years the senior Vice President of the Municipal Committee that Ram Lal tenant for sometime carried on utensils shop in one Portion of the shop and in the other a Karyana shop. It is again undisputed that, at least, for two and half years or so, before the date of the filing of the present application for ejectment by the landlord, on one side untensils shop is being carried on and on the other side a medicines shop is being carried on. In the Department of Sales-tax the untensils shop is shown in the name of Rajeshwar Pal, the elder son of the tenant, and the medicines shop is shown in the name of his younger son, Inder Mohan. As found by the Appellate Authority, and for this there is ample evidence on the record, even at present Ram Lal works on these two shops, though the business is mainly carried only by his sons.