JATINDER KUMAR Vs. GULSHAN KUMAR AND ANOTHER

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Ejectment of the tenant-petitioner was ordered by the Rent Controller, Jalandhar, vide order dated 16.11.2013, on the ground of subletting. Appeal preferred against the said order was dismissed, vide order dated 02.09.2015, being barred by time. And that is how, the tenant-petitioner is before this Court. In brief, the case set out by the landlord was that tenant-Jatinder Kumar had sublet the demised premises i.e. a shop for a consideration to respondent No.2, without consent or permission of the landlord. In fact, the tenant had moved abroad and surrendered possession to respondent No.2, who was conducting business and in exclusive control of the premises.

(2.) In defence, it was pleaded, inter alia, that there never existed any relationship of landlord and tenant between the parties. And, in any case, respondent No.1 had not sublet the demised premises to respondent No.2

(3.) However, tenant failed to lead any such evidence. As the exclusive possession of Naresh Kumar over the demised premises was established, the only conclusion one could arrive at was that the demised premises was sublet by the tenant. So much so, the tenant had even denied the very relationship of landlord and tenant between the parties and issue No.4 was specifically framed in this regard.