HARBANS KAUR Vs. KHARAITI LAL AND ANR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This judgment will dispose of two revision petitions bearing Nos, 744 and 745 of 1975. Both these revision petitions are directed against the order of the appellate authority dated 27th February, 1975, whereby the petitioners appeals against the order of the Rent Controller ordering her eviction had been dismissed and she was directed to vacate the premises within one month.

(2.) It is not disputed that Harbans Kaur petitioner had mortgaged the premises in dispute in each of the two revision petitions to the respondents in these petitions and subsequently executed a rent note in the respondents favour and obtained possession of the premises from them. Monthly rent in respect of both the premises was separately fixed. As no rent was paid, the respondents in both these revision petitions filed applications under Section 13 of the East Punjab Urban Rent Restriction Act for the eviction of the present petitioners and both these petitions were allowed and the appeals against those orders were dismissed. Harbans Kaur has now challenged the orders through the present revision petitions.

(3.) The principle and the only point for determination is whether there is relationship of landlord and tenant between the parties. The facts necessary for the decision of the point involved in these revision petitions are not in controversy as it is admitted that a mortgage in respect of this property was created and subsequently a rent note was also executed. The contention of Mr. Sarin is that in these circumstances the relationship of landlord and tenant does not come into existence and for this he has placed reliance on Baijnath and others v. Jang Bahadur Singh and anr., 1955 AIR(Pat) 357, wherein the following observations appear :