RAJINDER PARSHAD Vs. PARVEEN KUMAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS civil revision has been directed against the orders of the authorities below ordering ejectment of the petitioners from the shop in dispute on the ground that son, petitioner No. 1 has sublet the premises to his father, petitioner No. 2.

(2.) RESPONDENT -landlord sought ejectment of the petitioners on the ground of non-payment of rent as well as on the ground that son has sublet the shop to his father. The petition was contested by the petitioners who controverted the allegations made in the petition and stated that the ground of non-payment of rent is no more subsisting as the arrears of rent were tendered on the first date of hearing. With regard to the ground of subletting, it was stated that petitioner No. 1 (son) has not sublet or assigned his rights of tenancy to petitioner No. 2 (father). It was also stated that petitioner No. 2 is the father of petitioner No. 1 and both are members of a constituted Hindu Joint Family. They have common mess and business. The Rent Controller allowed the ejectment of the petitioners on the ground of subletting. On appeal, the appellate authority affirmed the ejectment order of the Rent Controller.

(3.) ON the other hand, Mr. V.K. Jain, Senior Advocate, learned counsel for the respondent contended that the tenant has taken a specific plea that the petitioners are the members of Hindu Joint Family and they have failed to prove that the business carried on in the premises is that of joint Hindu family and, therefore, the order of ejectment was rightly passed by the authorities below. He further contended that the son after taking the shop in dispute on rent, joined service and, thus subletting from son to father is proved. In support of his first contention, he relied upon :-