- (1.) Leave granted.
(2.) We have heard learned counsel for the parties.
(3.) This appeal arises out of a suit for possession filed by the respondent against the appellant in respect of a shop situate at Bhiwani in the State of Haryana. The shop was let out to one Asha Ram for a period of 11 months and after the expiry of the said period he continued in possession as a statutory tenant. Asha Ram died on 7/4/1979. The suit was filed on 2/6/1981 in the court of Senior Sub-Judge, Bhiwani. The case of the respondent in the plaint was that Asha Ram died issueless and that he had not married and that the appellant was in occupation of the premises as a servant of Asha Ram and that his possession was not authorised. The appellant, however, claimed that he was the son of Asha Ram and he had inherited the tenancy rights of Asha Ram. The trial court by its judgment and decree dated 24/1/1983 found that the appellant is the son of Asha Ram but it decreed the suit on the view that statutory tenancy of Asha Ram in respect of non-residential premises was not heritable and the appellant could not seek the protection of the provisions of the Haryana Urban (Control of Rent and Eviction) Act, 1973 (for short "the Haryana Act"). The said judgment and decree of the trial court was affirmed in appeal by the District Judge, Bhiwani by his judgment dated 10/9/1984. The District Judge has recorded that the finding of the trial court, that the appellant was the son of Asha Ram and not his servant, was not assailed before him by the learned counsel for the respondent during the course of arguments. The District Judge agreed with the view of the trial court that the statutory tenancy rights of Asha Ram in shop were not heritable. The second appeal filed by the appellant was dismissed in limine by the High court of Punjab and Haryana by order dated 19-10-1984. Hence, this appeal.;