K.M. MADHOK Vs. SURINDER MOHAN AGGARWAL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS revision petition is directed against the order of the appellate authority, who on appeal affirmed the order of the Rent Controller, ordering eviction of the petitioner from the demised premises.

(2.) THE facts : Respondent No. 1 (hereinafter referred to as the landlords) filed an application under section 13 of the East Punjab Urban Rent Restriction Act for eviction of the petitioner and Respondent No. 2 (for short the tenant) from the demised premises on the ground that the latter had rented out the demised premises for three months on payment of a monthly rent of Rs. 550/-. He was in a arrears of the rent since March 1979 and had sublet the premises to the petitioner.

(3.) THE petitioner inter-alia, pleaded that he had taken the demised premises on rent from Smt. Goma alias Om Mittal wife of Dr. B.K. Mittal at a monthly rent of Rs. 500/-. He paid rent to her upto February 29, 1980 vide Cheque No. BB 39 : 042567 dated 18.9.79 drawn in the name of her son R.K. Mittal. He denied that the tenant ever entered into possession of the demised premises. The creation of the alleged sub-tenancy in his favour is a malicious attempt on the part of the landlord to seek his eviction. The lease deed appears to have been fabricated by the landlord in connivance with the tenant.