SATYA DEVI Vs. RAM GOPAL ANGANIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Smt. Satya Devi filed an application seeking eviction of respondents 1 to 3 in the court of the learned Rent Controller, Solan on the ground of nonpayment of rent. Respondents 1 to 3 contested the said petition, inter alia, on the plea that there was no relationship of landlord and tenant between the parties. Actually, they set up a title in themselves.

(2.) The learned Rent Controller, Solan, vide his order made on Dec. 22, 1976, found that relationship of landlord and tenant stood established. He, therefore, proceeded, to pass an order of eviction with respect to the premises in dispute against respondents 1 to 3 but allowed them to pay the arrears of rent within 30 days in which eventuality the eviction order was not to be operative. The learned Appellate Authority, under the Himachal Pradesh Urban Rent Control Act, 1971, however, quashed the aforesaid order of eviction vide its judgement dated Feb. 15, 1980 and directed the parties to approach the civil court for having their respective claim of title to the premises in dispute established. Aggrieved from the aforesaid judgement, Smt. Satya Devi has filed the present civil revision.

(3.) It is not in dispute that M/s. Sant Ram Des Raj were the owners of the premises in dispute and that respondents 1 to 3 were the tenants. Shri Sant Ram was a partner of the firm - M/s. Sant Ram Des Raj but the capacity in which he was working as a partner in the said firm is a matter of controversy between the parties. Whereas the respondents allege that Shri Sant Ram was a partner in his individual capacity, the case of Smt. Satya Devi is that he was a partner of M/s. Sant Ram Des Raj in his capacity as a partner of M/s. Chaudhari Mal Mangat Ram of Matiana. In other words, it was the Maitana firm which was the partner in M/s. Sant Ram Des Raj.