KRISHAN LAL GUPTA Vs. BRIJ LAL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS revision petition has been instituted by the Landlord under Section 24(5) of the H.P. Urban Rent Control Act, 1987 (hereinafter referred to as the "Act") against the judgment and order of the learned Appellate Authority dismissing the eviction petition instituted by the petitioner against his tenant on the ground of subletting.

(2.) BRIEF facts of the case are that the petitioner who is the landlord, instituted ejectment proceedings against the respondents on the allegations that the premises had been let out to respondent No.1, Brij Lal, who was the tenant in the suit premises was, in arrears of rent and that the shop had been sublet by him to respondent No.2 Sadhu Ram without his permission. It is undisputed before me that the premises were let out for commercial purposes. The eviction petition was resisted on a number of grounds. It was pleaded that the landlord was habitual in not issuing receipts for the rent received by him and that respondent No.2 is his brother who had been working/assisting him in the business carried out in the suit premises.

(3.) THE evidence on behalf of the respondents has not been considered in detail by the learned Rent Controller, who, on the basis of the evidence of the witnesses of the Landlord, decreed the petition for eviction without in any manner considering the evidence on record to arrive at a finding as to whether the tenant had parted possession with the position of the premises and that the sub-tenant was in exclusive possession of the shop or not for valuable consideration.