SANT SINGH Vs. RAM KAUR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS is the landlord 'srevision against the judgment of the learned Appellate Authority reversing the order of eviction passed by the learned Rent Controller against the respondents.

(2.) THE petition was contested by the respondents pleading that the premises were rented out to the respondents by one Shri Gian Chand. It is their specific stand that the respondents are tenants of the premises in their own right as also members of Hindu undivided family of which respondent No. 1 Shri Darshan Singh became the Karta after the death of his father. The respondents pleaded that they are jointly in possession of the premises since 1969 and respondent No. 1 has not ceased to occupy the premises although additional accommodation has been acquired as, the families of both respondents No. 1 and 2 are increasing in number and it is not possible to put up in the demised premises which consists of two rooms, kitchen, bath room and corridor which, is in -sufficient for their needs. It was alleged that the respondents never refused payment of rent but as the relation between the parties became strained as they did not vacate the premises as desired by the petitioner. The petitioner deliberately refused to accept rent front respondent No. 1 who was Karta of the joint Hindu family of the respondents. Their stand was clear that respondent No. 1 had not at any point of time parted with the possession With or without consideration in favour of respondent No. 2 and despite the fact that additional accommodation has been acquired they are still living as one family. The learned Rent Controller, after trial, held that the respondents were in arrears of rent and that the premises were sublet by respondent No. 1 to respondent No.

(3.) TURNING to the pleadings and evidence on record, the learned Appellate Authority holds that on the question of subletting, there is no proper pleading. The simple allegation is that the premises have been sublet after the commencement of the Act which came into force in the year 1971. The learned Appellate Authority held and rightly so. that the respondents were tenants since 1970 and no written agreement was executed between the parties. The respondents were in -fact tenants which fact was acknowledged in the sale -deed Ex. P -2 dated 9.1.1970 when these premises were purchased by the petitioner and his brother Gian Singh from one Sardar Prem Singh. A close scrutiny of the evidence showed that the respondents are brothers and in 1969 they were aged about 9 and 10 years and that they were living jointly after the death of their father. They were working and messing together. This part of the testimony has remained un -rebutted. Ex.DZ is permission granted by the Municipal Corporation for a water connection in which 'No Objection ' has been given by the landlord. Column Nos. 5, 11, 12 and 13 of the application read: