SH RAM PARSHAD Vs. VED PARKASH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE respondent-landlord filed a petition Under Section 13 of the Haryana Urban (Control of Rent and Eviction) Act, 1973. It was dismissed by the Rent Controller. He filed an appeal. The appellate authority accepted his claim and held that the tenants were liable to be evicted on the grounds of change of user and making of alterations which materially affected the value and utility of the premises. It however, rejected the plea of the respondent-landlord that respondent-Ram Parshad had sublet the premises to his son, Mehar Chand. In view of the findings as noticed above, it accepted the claim of the landlord and passed an order of eviction. Aggrieved by this order, the petitioners have approached this Court through the present revision petition. Since Ram Parshad had died during the pendency of the revision petition, his legal representatives were impleaded as petitioners.

(2.) MR . M. L. Sarin, learned counsel for the petitioners has made the following submissions :

(3.) THE plea raised on behalf of the landlord was that the shop in dispute was originally let out to Shri Mohan Lal "expressly for the business of Bharbhuja" (roasted grams and other foodgrains ). After his death, his real brother Ram Parshad succeeded him and occupied the premises as a tenant and continued his business of Bharbhuja but subsequently, he changed the user and sub-let the premises to his son Mehar Chand without the written statement consent or permission of the landlord. In the written statement filed on behalf of the petitioners, it was pleaded that the shop had been taken on rent by "both Mohan Lal and Ram Parshad in the name of Joint Hindu Family firm namely Mohan Lal Ram Parshad and said name continued even after demise of Shri Mohan Lal who died in or about the year 1961. . . . . . . . . the name of the firm as changed to Ram Parshad Mehar Chand and the previous landlord accepted the changed name of firm and received rent. . . . . . It is wrong that shop was taken for conducting the business of Bharbhuja but was taken for conducting the business of selling grains". The tenancy was of the firm Mohan Lal Ram Parshad a Joint Hindu Family constituting all the main members of the family including Mehar Chand. It was further stated that the shop was "taken by Mohan Lal Ram Parshad for conducting the business of grain merchant, roasted and unroasted. " The respondent-landlord filed a replication controverting the claim made on behalf of the tenant.