PUNJAB KHADI MANDAL Vs. NARESH CHANDER AND OTHERS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The revision petition is at the instance of Punjab Khadi Mandal against the order directing ejectment. The petition for eviction had been filed at the instance of one Naresh Chander on the ground of non-payment of rent and subletting the premises. The petition had been originally instituted against Sube Singh arrayed as the 1st respondent and Haryana Khadi Mandal described as the 2nd respondent. The petitioner was relying on a deed of lease executed by the first respondent Sube Singh in favour of the petitioner's father Inderjit. The contention was that Sube Singh had sublet the premises to the Haryana Khadi Mandal. During the pendency of the proceedings, the Punjab Khadi Mandal sought impleadment on its own application considering that there had been an amalgamation of the Haryana Khadi Mandal with the Punjab Khadi Mandal and that it had come by all the assets of the Haryana Khadi Mandal.

(2.) The petition was contested, inter alia, that there had been no subletting at all and the property was taken by Sube Singh only as a Manager of Haryana Khadi Mandal. It was also contended on behalf of the tenant that the original tenancy had been only with the petitioner's father and the Mandal had never been informed about the transfer of interest in favour of the petitioner. In legal terms, it was seeking to contend that there had been no valid attornment in favour of Naresh Chander as the landlord.

(3.) The rent had been paid during the proceedings and the case survives consideration on the issues of Naresh Chander's alleged status as the landlord and the contention of sub-tenancy. The Court accepted the contention of the landlord and held that the tenancy had been made only in favour of the first respondent Sube Singh and the induction of the second respondent Mandal constituted a sub-tenancy. The Court also held that the petitioner had proved a family partition, under which the petitioner had obtained ownership to the property and being an owner, he must be only taken to be the landlord entitled to prosecute the petition. The appeal was filed only by the Haryana Khadi Mandal along with the Punjab Khadi Mandal and the appellate Court confirmed the decision of the Rent Controller. The revision is filed only at the instance of the Punjab Khadi Mandal as the transferee organization.