DEEPAK KUMAR Vs. HEM RAJ

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The present revision petition has been filed by Deepak Kumar, hereinafter described as "the petitioner" directed against the judgment of the learned Appellate Authority, Barnala, dated 4.9.1997. By virtue of the Impugned Judgment, the learned Appellate Authority, Barnala, had set aside the order passed by the learned Rent Controller, Barnala, dated 2.2.1994 and instead dismissed the petition for eviction.

(2.) The facts alleged are that Hem Raj is stated to be the tenant in the suit premises. A petition for eviction has been filed against him asserting that arrears of rent have not been paid from 1.2.1989 and that the tenant has sublet the suit premises to Durga Dass who is running the business of dry-cleaning without the consent of the petitioner-landlord in writing.

(3.) The petition for eviction had been contested. It was alleged that rent has already been paid uptil 30.3.1990 and further the Durga Dass is doing the work of dry-cleaning in one portion of the shop. They divide their earnings on 50:50 basis daily The entire shop remains in the possession of the respondent-tenant.