S.U.Khan, J. - (1.) Heard learned counsel for the parties.
(2.) This is tenants' writ petition arising out of suit for eviction and for recovery of arrears of rent filed by landlord respondent No.3 Arun Kumar Keshri against them. Both the petitioners are real brothers. The suit was registered as SCC Suit No. 236 of 1984.
(3.) Respondent No.3 landlord purchased the property in dispute through sale deed from its previous owner landlord on 25.10.1983. Rate of rent is Rs. 8/- per month. It was alleged in the plaint that Panna defendant No.1/petitioner No.2 was the tenant of the shop in dispute who had sublet the same to Bullu defendant No.2/petitioner No.1 The defence was that Purshottam father of the defendants petitioners was the tenant who had died about 16 years before filing of the suit and after his death all his heirs i.e. four sons including the two defendants became the tenants hence there was no question of any sub-tenancy in between defendant No.1 and 2. Courts below on the basis of Nagar Maha Palika records held that Panna was the tenant. This finding was recorded on the basis of Municipal records for the period from 1967 to 1976 (paper No.77 Ga). In the said record name of Panna was recorded as tenant occupant. In my opinion merely on the basis of municipal records status of tenant cannot be decided. More over Purshottam had died about 16 years before filing of the suit i.e. in or about 1968. In case Purshottam was the tenant then it was quite possible that after his death instead of names of all his sons only the name of Panna was recorded in the municipal records.;