LAWS(P&H)-1995-7-49

SHAM SUNDER Vs. MAHAVIR PARSHAD

Decided On July 25, 1995
SHAM SUNDER Appellant
V/S
Mahavir Parshad Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) BABU Ram, father of the plaintiffs purchased a plot vide Registered Sale Deed dated September 3, 1965. Thereafter, the demised premises were constructed by him in 1966. The plaintiffs inducted one Dharam Chand as tenant vide Rent Note, dated April 27, 1966, Exhibit P1, at a monthly rent of Rs. 20/-. Vide Rent Note, dated June 16, 1966, Exhibit P2, Dharam Chand had sublet that shop to defendant Sham Sunder at monthly rent of Rs. 35/- without the consent of the plaintiffs or their father. Plaintiffs filed a suit for possession after terminating the tenancy of Dharam Chand on the ground of subletting. During the pendency of the suit, the Act was amended regarding exemption of buildings from the operation of the provisions of the Act constructed after March 31, 1962. So, the suit was dismissed as withdrawn. Thereafter, the plaintiffs filed Suit No. 763 of 1984 on August 23, 1984 for decree for possession declaring that the possession of Sham Sunder defendant was unauthorised on the suit property.

(2.) DEFENDANT contested the suit. His case as per Para No. 3 of the written statement was that he was a direct tenant under Babu Ram father of the plaintiffs. However, in para 6 of the written statement, he took a stand that he was tenant under the plaintiffs. He admitted execution of the Rent Note Exhibit P2 in favour of Dharam Chand, but pleaded that he was in possession of the demised premises right from 1966 under Babu Ram and subsequently in order to obtain easy ejectment of the plaintiffs got Rent Note Exhibit P2 executed from him in favour of Dharam Chand who was benami tenant of the plaintiffs.

(3.) IN order to prove their case the plaintiffs proved on record Rent Note Exhibit P1, another Rent Note Exhibit P2, copy of Notice Exhibit P3, Postal Receipt Exhibit P4, Acknowledgement Due Exhibit P5, Plans Exhibits P6 and P7, Copy of Order dated September 8, 1978 Exhibit P8 and Copy of statement of learned counsel for the defendant Exhibit P9, and examined Satish Chand PW1, Budh Ram PW2, Subhash Chand PW 3 and Babu Ram PW4.