MOHAN SINGH Vs. UDHAM SINGH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS is landlord's petition in whose favour eviction order was passed by the Rent Controller but has been set aside in appeal.

(2.) THE landlord Mohan Singh filed an ejectment application in respect of the house in dispute, alleging that he had purchased the same from Udham Singh, vide sale deed dated 14th March, 1974. Udham Singh, the original owner, had inducted Udham Singh as his tenant, and after the sale in his favour he had become the landlord qua Udham Singh. The ejectment was sought on the ground that the tenant Udham Singh had neither paid nor tendered the rent with effect from 1st May, 1974; that he had sublet the premises to Kirpal Singh, respondent No. 2 (who died during the pendency of the ejectment application) before the Rent Controller and his legal representatives were brought on record as respondent Nos. 2 to 4 without consent of the landlord; that he bonafide required the demised premises for his own use and occupation as at present he was residing in a rented house; that the building had become unfit and unsafe for human habitation. In the written statements filed on behalf of Udham Singh and Kirpal Singh it was pleaded that there was no relationship of landlord and tenant between the parties; that the original owner never inducted Udham Singh as a tenant, and it was Surjit Kaur, wife of Kirpal Singh, who was the tenant on the demised premises under the original owner. The other allegations were also controverted. The learned Rent Controller found that since Mohan Singh had purchased the property from the original owner, he had become the landlord qua the tenants, and, thus, there was a relationship of landlord and tenant between the parties. Ultimately, the ejectment order was passed on the ground that the landlord bonafide required the premises for his own use and occupation. In appeal, the learned Appellate Authority did not go into the merits of the petition, but on the question of relationship of landlord and tenant between the parties, it found that merely because Mohan Singh had purchased the property from the earlier owner did not make him the landlord unless it was further proved that his vender had inducted Udham Singh as a tenant. On that short ground, the ejectment application was dismissed. Dissatisfied with the same, the landlord Mohan Singh has filed this petition.

(3.) THE parties, through counsel, are directed to appear before the Rent Controller on 1st February, 1986, who will provide an opportunity to the landlord to amend his application, as directed, and then proceed-with the same in accordance with law. The records of the case be sent back forthwith. Order accordingly.