OM PARKASH Vs. VED PARKASH AND OTHERS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS revision has been filed by Om Parkash tenant against the order of the Appellate Authority Sonepat, dated November 24, 1977.

(2.) BRIEFLY the facts are that the firm M/s Hargobind Chandgi Ram was the owner of the shop in dispute. Chandgi Ram was the sole proprietor of the said firm. The shop was given on lessee by the firm through Mool Chand Attorney, so Om Parkash vide rent deed dated August 18, 1958 at a rent of Rs. 35/ - pet mensem. Later Chandgi Ram executed a registered will dated March 6, 1968 in favour of Suresh Kumar, Naresh Kumar, Ram Parkash and Ved Parkash, sons of Sant Lal. Chandgi Ram died on October 16, 1970. It is alleged that after the death of Chandgi Ram, Naresh Kumar, Ram Parkash, Ved Parkash and Suresh Kumar became owners of the property and become entitled to take rent from Om Parkash tenant. Naresh Kumar. Ram Parkash and Ved Parkash filed an application against Om Parkash for ejectment on the ground that he had not paid rent from October 18. 1970 to March 13, 1976 Suresh Kumar did not join them as petitioner and consequently he was impleaded as a respondent.

(3.) THE only question that arises for determination is as to whether relationship of landlord and tenant exists between Ved Parkash etc, and Om Parkash or not The Rent Controller as well as the Appellate Authority came to the conclusion that there was such a relationship between the parties, The finding is a finding of fact and is binding in revision on this Court. I have, however, examined the matter carefully and find that the conclusions arrived at by the Rent Controller and the Appellate Authority are correct. The property in dispute belonged to M/s, Hargobind Chandgi Ram, of which Chandgi Ram was the proprietor. Mool Chand gave the property on lease on behalf of Hargobind Chandgi Ram vide Rent Deed dated August 18, 1955, Exhibit AW -5/1. Chandgi Ram executed a registered will in favour of Suresh Kumar, Naresh Kumar, Ram Parkash and Ved Parkash on March 6, 1968 vide Exhibit AW -3/1 and bequeathed the property in dispute to them. He died on October 13, 1970 and thereafter Ved Parkash, etc, became the owners of the property and consequently became entitled to realise the rent from Om Parkash. Thus they become landlords qua Om Parkash. Admittedly Om Parkash did not tender the arrears of rent, interest and costs on the first date of hearing Consequently, he became liable to ejectment for non -payment of rent.