SARUP CHAND Vs. RAJ KUMAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) IT is not disputed at either end that if the statutory tenancy is held to be heritable, the appeal is without merit. This is the only question feebly agitated by the appellant's learned counsel.

(2.) APPELLANT, Sarup Chand had let the shop in question to Sawan Kumar vide lease deed for the period 1. 4. 1968 to 30. 3. 1969. After the expiry of the contractual period of tenancy, Sawan Ram stayed in the shop in question. He died on 6. 5. 1973. The landlord filed a suit for possession with respect to the shop in question against the legal representatives of the deceased tenant besides recovery of the specified amount for damages, use and occupation. It was asserted that Sawan Ram was the statutory tenant and after his death, his legal representatives did not inherit or acquire tenancy rights.

(3.) BOTH the courts below did not accept the plea of the appellant on this count and held that the tenancy was heritable. The appellant has come to this court in second appeal.