ANIL KUMAR Vs. ANGURI DEVI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS revision petition has been filed by the alleged sub- tenants of the premises in question, challenging the orders passed by the Courts below whereby the Rent Controller had ordered the ejectment and the appeal filed by the alleged sub-tenants was dismissed by the appellate authority.

(2.) THE facts which are relevant for the decision of the present revision petition and that Smt. Anguri Devi etc. (landlords) filed the ejectment petition under Section 13 of the Haryana Urban (Control of Rent and Eviction) Act, 1973 (hereinafter referred to as "the Haryana Act") against M/s Upper Indian Woollen Mills Limited, Panipat, being the tenant and M/s Navin Bharat Woollen and Cotton Industries and others as sub-tenants. It was alleged that originally Tirlochan Lal and Lakshmi Chand were the owners to the extent of 1/2 share, while the other half portion was owned by Paras Ram and Daulat Ram. It was alleged that after the death of Daulat Ram, his share was inherited by Pawan Kumar. It was further alleged that Smt. Anguri Devi had purchased the share of Lakshmi Chand and Tarlochan Lal through registered sale deed dated May 6, 1974. In this manner, Smt. Anguri Devi ect. were the owners and landlords of the building in question. It was alleged that previously M/s Upper India Woollen Mills Limited was holding the property in question as a tenant under the previous owners and now respondent No. 1 was the tenant under the present landlords Smt. Anguri Devi etc. It was alleged that the rate of rent was Rs. 425/- per annum. It was further alleged that the tenant was liable to be ejected from the premises in question, firstly on the ground of non-payment of rent; secondly on the ground that the tenant had sub-let the entire tenanted premises to M/s Navin Bharat Woollen and Cotton Industries and others (sub-tenants) who were at present in occupation of the premises in question and that the tenant had parted with the possession of the property in question in their favour; thirdly, it was alleged that the tenant and the sub-tenants had made structural alterations in the premises in question and thereby had impaired materially the value or utility of the building in question and fourthly, the building in question had become unsafe and unfit for human habitation. It was also alleged that the landlords asked the tenant and sub-tenants to vacate the premises but they failed to do so.

(3.) ON the pleadings of the parties, various issues were framed. The learned Rent Controller held that the landlords have been able to prove that M/s Upper India Woollen Mills Limited was the tenant, whereas the alleged sub-tenants had failed to prove that they were direct tenants under the original landlords. It was further held that the tenant and the alleged sub-tenants were liable to be ejected from the premises in question on the ground of sub- letting, non-payment of rent and materially impairing the value or utility of the premises in dispute. However, it was held that the landlords have failed to prove that the building had become unsafe and unfit for human habitation. Resultantly, the learned Rent Controller ordered the ejectment of the tenant and the alleged sub-tenants from the premises in question. The appeal filed by the alleged sub-tenants was dismissed by the learned appellate authority, upholding the findings of the learned Rent Controller, referred to above. Aggrieved against the orders of the Courts below, the alleged sub-tenants have filed the present revision petition in this Court.