GIAN CHAND Vs. PREM CHADHA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS is tenant's revision, challenging the order dated 15.1.1986 of the Appellate Authority vide which it affirmed the order of his ejectment from the demised shop passed by the Rent-Controller, on the ground of non-payment of rent.

(2.) UNDISPUTED facts are that the shop was let out to the petitioner by Shanti Devi deceased, mother of Smt. Prem and Smt. Sardaran respondents, vide rent note dated 3.5.1954 and the rate of rent was Rs. 30 per month. Since Shanti Devi was deaf and dumb, this court had appointed Prem respondent as the Guardian of her properties, vide order dated 23.3.1959. She died on 10.11.1980. Her husband, Shanti Sarup, filed a suit for declaration to the effect that he is absolute owner of her estate including the shop in question. In the alternative, he asked for grant of 1/3rd share in her properties, by partition, and also for rendition of accounts of the income of properties, including the rent realised by Prem as manager (guardian) of the properties. He also claimed relief of injunction restraining Prem and Sardaran from realising rent from the tenants. Gian Chand petitioner was a party to that suit. Shanti Sarup had claimed his entitlement to the entire estate of Shanti Devi, being Khana-damad in the house of his in-laws. He also pleaded that his daughters, Prem and Sardaran, had no right to succeed to the estate of Shanti Devi. Prem and Sardaran set up a will, alleged to have been executed in their favour by Shanti Devi. On the application of Shanti Sarup for grant of interim relief, the learned Sub-Judge, 1st Class, Jalandhar, ordered vide Ex. A4 dated 17.3.1981, that Prem who would have right to realise rent from the tenants till the final disposal of the suit, in accordance with the orders of this court dated 23.3.1959 (supra). The learned Sub-Judge further restrained Shanti Sarup from stopping Prem to realise rent from the tenants. Thereafter, that Prem and Sardaran filed an application under Section 13 of the East Punjab Urban Rent Restriction Act, 1949 (for short, "the Act") against Gian Chand petitioner for his ejectment from the shop under reference, on the ground of non-payment of rent.

(3.) THE Rent-Controller framed the following issues :