SOMATIA DEVI Vs. SHIV DAYAL DAULAT RAM

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS revision is directed against judgment dated 13.10.1982 of Appellate Authority, Faridkot vide which it allowed Appeal No. 18 of 1980 filed by respondent No. 1-M/s Shiv Dayal Daulat Ram and ordered ejectment of the petitioner and respondent No. 2. Smt. Durga Devi from the demised premises (room).

(2.) RESPONDENT No. 1 filed an application under Section 13 of the East Punjab Urban Rent Restriction Act, 1949 for eviction of respondent No. 2 to whom the room was leased out, had not paid the rent at the rate of Rs. 14/- per month since 21.3.1973 and had sub-let the same to the petitioner without its consent. Respondent No. 2 did not appear to contest the application. In her written statement, the petitioner admitted that respondent No. 1 was the owner of the room but denied that the same was leased out to respondent No. 2. She averred that the room in question had been let out to her and she was continuously paying the rent. She averred that the rent due from 26.5.1979 was tendered alongwith interest and costs, but the representative of respondent No. 1 refused to accept the same by saying that she was not the tenant. She further averred that the previous application filed by respondent No. 1 had been dismissed and, therefore, the second application was not maintainable. Still further she averred that respondent No. 2 was a lady of high status and could never live in a small kothri. The brothers of respondent No. 2 are leading doctors at Jaitu and her son is serving in England and, therefore, there was no occasion for her to take the small room on rent. The petitioner also questioned the very maintainability of the eviction application on the ground that Mohinder Partap was not competent to represent respondent No. 1.

(3.) RESPONDENT No. 1 examined Krishan Kant AW2 and Ram Rakha AW3 and produced Ex.A2 to prove that respondent No. 2 was the tenant.