BRIJ BHUSAN Vs. RAM SINGH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE present petition is directed against order of the Appellate Authority under the Haryana Urban (Control of Rent and Eviction) Act, 1973, by which the ejectment of the petitioner, who is alleged to be a sub-tenant in the demised promisses, has been ordered.

(2.) THE facts giving rise to the petition here are as under:- Respondent No. 1 Ram Singh Verma, who is owner of the shop in dispute, filed an ejectment application against the alleged tenant Kishan Chand Bansal, who is stated to have been inducted as tenant on 1. 12. 1972, on two grounds: (i) that the tenant had not paid rent for the period from 1. 4:1975 onwards (ii) that the shop had been sub-let by Krishan Chand Bansal respondent No. 1 to the present petitioner, Brij Bhushan, without his consent.

(3.) THE respondents filed two separate written statements in the court of the Rent Controller, wherein Kishan Chand Bansal admitted that he had taken the shop on rent but at the same time pleaded that he had vacated the premises and restored the possession to the owner, who had himself locked the shop in question and as such he did not know in what circumstances respondent Brij Bhushan happened to enter into possession of the said shop. The petitioner, herein, in his written statement denied that the shop was sub-let to him by Kishan Chand Bansal but claimed that the same had been given to him by the landlord himself on rent with effect from 6. 1. 72 at the rent of Rs. 40/- per month and further that he had already paid the rent for the period upto July 1978 and was willing to pay the rent for the remaining period.