SACHIDANAND Vs. KAILASH CHAND & OTHERS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The authorities below have held petitioner Sachidanand (hereinafter referred to as tenant) to be in arrears of rent, w.e.f. November, 2008 till September, 2015, as also having sublet the tenanted premises, without the consent of the landlord-respondent Kailash Chand (hereinafter referred to as the landlord), to the sub-tenant Banarsi Dass.

(2.) Petition filed by the landlord, for ejectment on these two counts, stands allowed by the Rent Controller (III), Shimla, vide Order dated 10.9.2014, passed in Rent Petition (RBT) No.37/2 of 15/09, titled as Kailash Chand & another v. Sachidanand & another, as affirmed by the Lower Appellate Authority (IV), Shimla, vide judgment dated 29.12.2016, passed in Rent Appeal No.35-S/14 of 2015, titled as Sachidanand v. Kishal Chand and others.

(3.) Insofar as the question of non-payment of rent is concerned, one may only observe that by virtue of Section 14(2) of the Himachal Pradesh Urban Rent Control Act, 1987 (hereinafter referred to as the Act), if the tenant were to pay the amount so quantified by the Rent Controller, within the statutory period, the order of ejectment becomes in-executable.