SURESH KUMAR Vs. MOOL CHAND

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This is landlord's petition whose ejectment application has been dismissed by both the authorities below.

(2.) The landlords sought the ejectment of their tenant Mool Chand from the premises in dispute, inter alia, that it was in a dilapidated condition and not fit for human habitation. According to the landlords, one Chandgi Ram was previously the owner of the premises in dispute. Chandgi Ram executed a Will dated 6th July, 1968 in their favour. On the death of Chandgi Ram on 16th October, 1970 they had become the owners of the demised premises and also the landlords of Mool Chand tenant. According to them, they were realising rent from Mool Chand and now he had sublet a portion of the shop in dispute to respondent No. 2 Jaggi, without their consent.

(3.) In the written statement the respondents denied the relationship of landlord and tenant between the parties. They asserted that Mool Chand was the owner of the demised premises and a portion of it, namely, the shop, was in the occupation of Shri Gordhan Dass, father of respondent No.2, as his tenant since 2nd February, 1962 at the monthly rent of Rs. 24/- and the other part of the property in dispute was in possession of Radhey Sham son of Kishori Lal, who was also a tenant under him at the rate of Rs. 60/- per month since the year 1968. Accordingly, they pleaded that the petition was not maintainable and was bad for non-joinder of Gordhan Dass and Radhey Sham. They refuted the contentions that the deceased Chandgi Ram was the owner/landlord of the demised premises. They also disputed the genuineness of the Will allegedly executed by Chandgi Ram in favour of the petitioners.