PUNJAB NATIONAL BANK Vs. PREM CHAND GUPTA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE premises in dispute located at Timber Market, Ambala Cantt, belonging to Sh. Prem Chand Gupta was taken on rent of Rs. 1482/- per month, besides Municipal tax etc. by the Hindustan Commercial Bank, Ltd., Kanpur, on 25th January, 1977. The landlord filed application before the Rent Controller for fixation of fair rent under Section 4 of the Haryana Urban (Control of Rent and Eviction) Act, 1973 (hereinafter called the Act). The Rent Controller accepted this application and fixed the fair rent fair rent at Rs. 1813.10. Being aggrieved against said order, the Hindustan Commercial Bank Ltd. went in appeal under Section 15 of the Act before the Appellate Authority, Ambala. During the pendency of this appeal, the Hindustan Commercial Bank was amalgamated with the Punjab National Bank vide Central Government Notification No. 17/2/86.B.O.III (ii), dated 18th December, 1986. The Punjab National Bank then moved an application under the provisions of rule 10 of Order 22 of the Code of Civil Procedure for its substitution as appellant, contending that by virtue of the notification issued by the Central Government under Section 45 of the Banking Regulation Act, 1949, all the rights and liabilities, including its right to tenancy etc. of the Hindustan Commercial Bank has since been acquired by the Punjab National Bank. This application was resisted by the landlord contending that the transfer of these rights of the premises in dispute in favour of the Punjab National Bank by the original tenant Bank amounted to sub-letting or transfer of right under the lease and thus under the provisions of Section 13(2)(ii)(a) of the Act, the tenant as well as the sub-tenant are liable to be ejected. it was also contended that the landlord had already filed an application for ejectment on this very ground before the Rent Controller. The learned Appellate Authority vide its order dated 10th March 1987, dismissed the application of the Punjab National Bank by holding that the transfer of rights under the lease as also the sub-letting of the premises without the written consent of the landlord, would certainly be a good ground for ejectment and that the Punjab National Bank has not become a tenant of the premises in dispute. Reliance in this regard was placed on the decision of this court in Produce Exchange Corporation Ltd. Hoshiarpur v. Som Nath s/o Nanak Chand and others, 1983(2) RCR 202 : 1983 HRR 303, as well as of the Supreme Court in M/s. Parasram Harnand Rao v. M/s Shanti Parsad Narinder Kumar Jain and others, 1980(2) RCR 520 : AIR 1980 Supreme Court 1655, besides of the Andhra Pradesh High Court in M.A. Khader v. M/s General Radio Appliances (P) Ltd. and another, AIR 1977 Andhra Pradesh 115. Thereafter, the Appellate Authority disposed of the parent appeal on 21st March, 1987 by hearing the learned counsel for the Hindustan Commercial Bank and reduced the fair rent to Rs. 1778.90 per month on the basis of some mistake on the part of the Rent Controller in calculating the same.

(2.) FEELING aggrieved against the said orders, the Punjab National Bank has come up in this revision petition, which was admitted by D.V. Sehgal, J. mainly against the order of the Appellate Authority dismissing the application of the Punjab National Bank under the provisions of Order 22 rule 10 of the Code of Civil Procedure.

(3.) THERE is no dispute between the parties that transfer of any right under the lease or sub-letting the premises in dispute by the tenant without the written consent of the landlord is a good ground for ejectment under the provisions of section 13(2)(ii)(a) of the Act. The relevant provisions of the said Act run as under :-