- (1.) PRAKASH Krishna, J. This is a tenant's petition. It arises out of SCC Suit No. 343 of 1979 filed by the respondent No. 3 against B. C. Halliburn who died during the pendency of the suit leaving behind him the petitioner Nos. 1, 2 and 3 as heirs, for recovery of arrears of rent, damages and ejectment in respect of the part of Bungalow No. 10, General Carriappa Road, Agra. The suit was filed on the pleas inter alia that the defendant-tenant has failed to pay the rent since December 1972 and his tenancy has been terminated by a notice of demand dated 28-8-1974 which was served on him on 29-8-1974. It was further pleaded that the property in question is a trust property and the trust was created by late Hakim Madan Mohan through registered Will dated 22-7-1911. The trust is known as 'thakur Madan Mohan Ji Maharaj' and Sri R. P. Nagar is the president and looking after the affairs of the trust and he has been duly authorised by the other co-trustees, namely, S/sri Mahesh Chand Agarwal, K. L. Bansal, A. K. Lavania and A. K. Shukla, the duly appointed trustees. Sri R. P. Nagar claimed that he is special power of attorney holder on behalf of the trustees authorising him to institute the present suit. It was further pleaded that the defendant No. 1, C. Halliburn has sublet a portion in the tenanted accommodation to defendant No. 2, Mrs. G. Westcott unauthorisedly without the permission of the landlord.
(2.) THE suit was contested by the defendant by denying the plaint allegations. However, in para-14 of the written statement, it was admitted that the property in question is a trust property. THE plea that the suit is not maintainable in view of Section 48 of the Indian Trusts Act was also raised. It was further pleaded that the defendant No. 1 has not sublet the disputed premises to defendant No. 2 and the defendant No. 2 is in occupation of a portion in her own right due to allotment order in her favour with the permission of the landlord. THE plea that the Court has no jurisdiction to try the suit was also raised. The parties led evidence in support of their respective cases. The trial Court, on the basis of the pleadings of the parties, framed issues and decreed the suit on the findings that there is a relationship of landlord and tenant between the parties, the defendant has admittedly failed to pay any rent since December, 1972 and has also sublet a portion of the tenanted accommodation to defendant No. 2. In other words, both the grounds, namely, 'the default in payment' and 'sub-letting' were found favour with the trial Court in decreeing the suit. The said decree has been confirmed in Civil Revision No. 41 of 1985. It may be noted here that the alleged sub-tenant i. e. Mrs. G. Westcott also filed a separate revision which was numbered as Civil Revision No. 43 of 1985. Both the revisions were heard together and were disposed of by a common judgment dated 15-7-1991 which is under challenge in the present writ petition.
(3.) MRS. G. Westcott had filed a separate writ petition No. 25066 of 1991 against the impugned order passed in her revision No. 43 of 1985. The said writ petition was connected along with the present writ petition by the order dated 5-9-1991. However, the writ petition No. 25066 of 1991 has been dismissed by this Court vide order dated 20-7-2005, for want of prosecution. Sri Ajit Kumar, learned Counsel appearing for the petitioners in the present writ petition mainly submitted that there was no relationship of landlord and tenant between the parties and the suit was not maintainable in view of Section 48 of the Indian Trusts Act and as such, the Court below had no jurisdiction to entertain and decide the suit. In other words, he submitted that Sri R. P. Nagar had no authority to institute the suit giving rise to the present writ petition.;