KARTAR SINGH Vs. BACHAN SINGH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE facts giving rise to these two connected revision petitions Nos. 902 and 903 of 1971 are these. Bachan Singh, his brother Ratan Singh and their mother Karam kaur were owners of a vacant site, measuring about 4 Kanals, situate in Moga, district Ferozepur. On 14th May, 1951, vide Exhibit A-6, Bachan Singh and his brother Ratan Singh gave on rent a vacant site, measuring 1 Kanal 19 Marlas, comprised in Khasra No. 6711/2419, on a portion of which was constructed one house, consisting of 4 rooms, rest being a courtyard, to Sardara Singh for a period of 4 years and 2 months, commencing from 1st June, 1951, at a monthly rent of rs. 100/ -. Subsequently, on 15th January, 1955, vide Exhibit A-1, Bachan Singh leased out the adjoining vacant site measuring approximately 27 Marlas to Sardara Singh for one year at Rs. 65/-per month, commencing from that very date. Sardara Singh then started carrying on the business of a saw mill on these premises. Thereafter, he took his brother Kartar Singh son of Bhagat Singh as a partner with him in the said business. The exact date when he did so, is not quite clear on the record. On 24th June, 1966, there was a partition between the two brothers, namely, Sardara Singh and Kartar Singh, regarding the business of the saw mill and some other properties. In the partition, the tenancy rights in the premises and this business came to the share of Kartar Singh. On 29th August, 1966, Kartar Singh entered into an agreement for the sale of this business along with the tenancy rights in the premises in favour of Hardev Singh and his two brothers Baldev Singh and Kartar Singh alias Sewa Singh for Rs. 12,000/-and he took Rupees 4,000/- as earnest money. One condition in this agreement was that kartar Singh would see that the vendees are accepted as tenants of the premises by the owners thereof. Out of this Rs. 12,000/-, Rupees 1,000/- were kept with one Bihari Lal Jindal as security for making the owners accept the vendees as the tenants of the premises. On 6th April, 1967, Ratan Singh served a notice on the vendees, namely, Hardev Singh and his brothers Baldev Singh and Kartar Singh alias Sewa Singh, requiring them to pay the half-rent of the premises, i. e. , Rs. 60/per month, to him, because he was the owner of the premises along with his brother Bachan Singh. On 15th April, 1967, Ratan Singh executed a Kabuliatnama, exhibit R-3, accepting the vendees as his tenants qua half share in the property, at a monthly rent of Rs. 60/ -. On the same day, he received rent also for the period 1st April, 1967 to 30th April, 1967, by virtue of receipt, Exhibit R-4. On 24th April, 1967, Rs. 1,000/- which were kept with Bihari Lal Jindal as security, were taken by Kartar Singh, because in the meantime Ratan Singh had executed the Kabuliatnama in favour of the vendees. On 31st March, 1968, Ratan Singh by another receipt Exhibit R-18, received Rs. 240/-from the vendees as rent from 1st december, 1967, to 31st March, 1968. On 11th August, 1968, vide Exhibit R-20, ratan Singh served a notice, through a counsel, on the vendees saying that the rent due had not been paid and the same should be immediately paid to him, otherwise ejectment proceedings would be started against them. In the meantime, on 7th February, 1964, Karam Kaur, the mother of Bachan singh and Rattan Singh, filed a suit for partition of the joint property, including the two premises in dispute against her two sons. This suit was decreed on 30th June, 1965 and these premises came to the share of Bachan Singh alone. According to vendees, that decree, however, was prepared on a plain paper and not drawn upon a non-judicial stamp-paper. On 7th June, 1967, out of the joint Khasra No. 6711/2419, Rattan Singh sold 10 Marlas along with some other land, to Mohinder kaur for Rs. 15,000/ -. On 5th January, 1968, she served a notice on the vendees saying that she had purchased 10 Marlas, out of the said Khasra number, on which the saw mill of the vendees was working and, therefore, the rent of that portion should in future be paid to her, otherwise she would be forced to file ejectment proceedings against them. On 7th June, 1968, Balbir Singh son of Bachan Singh filed a suit for pre-emption regarding the sale made by Rattan Singh on 7th June, 1967. What happened to this pre-emption suit is not clear on the record. On the 12th June, 1968 Mohinder Kaur filed an ejectment application against the vendees on the ground of non-payment of rent. On 2nd August, 1968, the arrears of rent, i. e. , Rs. 120/- plus costs and interest were paid by the vendees to mohinder Kaur before the Rent Controller on the first date of hearing, with the result that this application was dismissed on the same day vide Exhibit R-15. On 31st August, 1968, Bachan Singh filed two ejectment applications against the vendees. He also impleaded Sardara Singh and his brother Kartar Singh in both these applications. The two applications, according to him, had to be made because, there were two separate tenancies one dated 14th May, 1951, Exhibit A6, and the other dated 15th January, 1955, Exhibit A-1. His grounds were that the premises had come to his share in partition in July, 1965. As regards the tenancy covered by Exhibit A-6, the grounds of ejectment were: firstly, that Sardara Singh had not paid the rent from 1st June, 1963, and secondly that he had sublet the premises to his brother Kartar Singh and the three vendees. As regards the other tenancy covered by Exhibit A-1, the grounds of ejectment were (i) that the rent had not been paid regarding the same from 1st June, 1964, and (ii) that Sardara singh had sublet these premises in the same way as he had done the other one.

(2.) THESE applications were contested only by the vendees, because Sardara Singh and his brother Kartar Singh admitted the claim of Bachan Singh. The case set up by the vendees was that Bachan Singh and Ratan Singh, and not their mother karam Kaur, were the owners of both these premises, which had not falled to the share of Bachan Singh on partition as alleged by him, with the result that he alone could not file the ejectment applications. They denied that there was any subletting, because they were the direct tenants of Bachan Singh and Rattan Singh. Regarding the payment of rent, it was pleaded that half of the rent had already been paid by them to Rattan Singh, but in spite of that, they were prepared to pay whatever rent was demanded by Bachan Singh, provided he acknowledged them as tenants. It was also alleged that no notice under Section 106, Transfer of property Act, had been issued by Bachan Singh and, consequently, in the absence of such a notice, the ejectment applications were not maintainable. It was further said that Rattan Singh was also a necessary party, especially when he never wanted to eject them from the premises in question. It was also pleaded that after sardara Singh had taken both these premises on rent, he had joined his brother kartar Singh as a partner with him and both of them had then raised constructions on the vacant site. These constructions had also been sold to them by virtue of the sale-deed, Exhibit R-7. That being so, the Rent Controller had no jurisdiction to order their ejectment from these premises.

(3.) ON the pleadings of the parties, the following issues were framed:--