RAMEL DASS Vs. RAM PIARI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS is a tenant's petition against whom eviction order has been passed by both the authorities below.

(2.) LANDLORDS Smt. Ram Piari and Smt. Kaushalaya Devi sought the ejectment of their tenant Smt. Raj Rani from the shop in dispute on the ground of subletting by her to Ramel Dass (petitioner) and for non-payment of arrears f rent with effect from 1966 onwards. The ejectment application was filed on 9th April, 1975. In the written statement filed on behalf of Ramel Dass he took the plea that he was not the tenant of Raj Rani respondent No. 3 as alleged by the landladies. He had taken the shop in dispute from Ganpat Ram and Pritam Dass at the monthly rent of Rs. 30/-. Thus he also denied the relationship of landlord and tenant between the parties. The learned Rent Controller found that it is proved that the petitioners in the ejectment application are owners and landlords of the disputed shop. He further found that it is proved that Shrimati Raj Rani - respondent No. 3 - has sublet the shop in dispute to Ramel Dass and that Ramel Dass has failed to prove he that had taken the shop in dispute from Ganpat Ram and Pritam Dass as alleged by him. Thus, the subletting was held to be proved. On the question of non-payment of arrears of rent, the learned Rent Controller found that the rent tendered was insufficient. In view of these findings the eviction order was passed.

(3.) LEARNED counsel for the petitioner contended that Kishan Chand was the original tenant, who occupied the premises in dispute upto the year 1961. After that the premises were let out to Ramel Dass petitioner by Ganpat Ram and Pritam Dass. According to the learned counsel, there is not cogent evidence on the record to prove that Kishan Chand, who died on 25th December, 1967 vide Death Certificate Ex.R.2, was in occupation of the premises in dispute till his death. Thus, argued the learned counsel, in view of the absence of such evidence, it could not be held that Ramel Dass was inducted in the premises in dispute after the death of Kishan Chand, when it has been proved on record that he was already in occupation of the premises in the year 1965. He also referred to the statements of A.W.3 Bhola Nath and R.W. 5 P.N. Hastir in order to show that the licence of Kishan Chand for selling tobacco was renewed only upto 1964 and, therefore, after that he left the premises and the same were rented out to Ramel Dass.