Yatindra Singh, J. - (1.) Today, if a tenant of a non-residential building-governed by U. P. Urban Buildings (Regulation of Letting, Rent and Eviction) Act. 1972 (the new Act) -admits a person who is not a member of his family as a partner or takes a new partner, he is deemed to have ceased to occupy the premises (Section 12 (2) of the new Act). He is also deemed to have sublet the building (Section 25 (2) Explanation (i) of the new Act). The tenant could avoid this consequence only if it is a bona fide transaction (not a mere cover up for Sub-letting) and had made an application in this behalf before the District Magistrate before admission of such partner. In this event, the non-residential building could be allotted to the newly constituted or re-constituted firm (Rule 10 (6) proviso (a) of the new Rules).
(2.) But what is the position if the aforesaid provisions are not applicable? Was it the same, when U. P. (Temporary) Control of Rent and Eviction Act, 1947 (the old Act) was applicable? What is the status of the partner after the tenant dies and partnership dissolves? Is a licensee of a tenant or a person on behalf of a tenant, whose possession continues till tenancy lasts, entitled to challenge the decree of eviction? Can he resist it? These are the questions, involved in this case. THE FACTS
(3.) Sri Lalta Prasad was owner of the building situate in Moballa Urdu Bazar, Gorakhpur. It has two floors. The western portion of the ground floor of the building is residential and eastern portion is a shop. He sold this building to Sri Ram Das Gupta (the landlord) and became his tenant of the ground floor on 2.5.1963. They agreed that : * Ram Das Gupta would start living on the first floor of the building. * Sri Lalta Prasad would continue to occupy the ground floor as a tenant at the rate of Rs. 75 per month. * He could take a partner for doing business in the shop. Thus. Sri Lalta Prasad (the original tenant) became tenant of the ground floor. He entered into an alleged partnership with one Sri Navneet Das (the contesting respondent) to carry on business in the shop " on 13.3.1969. The original tenant died on 22.5.1970 and was survived by respondent Nos. 4 to 7 (the tenants), who inherited the tenancy.;