- (1.) S. U. Khan, J. Heard learned Counsel for the parties.
(2.) THIS is tenant's writ petition arising out S. C. C. Suit No. 39 of 1985 filed by landlord Arjun Singh- respondent No. 3 in this writ petition against petitioner-the main tenant and respondents No. 4 to 6-the sub-tenants. Eviction was sought on the ground of default, material alteration and sub-letting. Additional J. S. C. C. , Agra decided all the issues in favour of the tenant and dismissed the suit on 29-7- 1997. Against the said judgment and decree, landlord respondent filed civil revision (ought to be S. C. C. Revision) No. 193 of 1999. IIIrd Additional District Judge, Agra, through judgment and order dated 6-4- 2000, allowed the revision and decreed the suit for eviction only on the ground of sub-letting. In respect of default, both the Courts below gave benefit of Section 20 (4) of U. P. Urban Buildings (Regulation of Letting, Rent and Eviction) Act, 1972, to the tenant as on the first date of hearing the tenant had deposited entire arrears of rent etc. Revisional Court permitted the landlord to withdraw the said amount. Rent/damages @ Rs. 600/- per month (as against the agreed rent of Rs. 220/- per month) were also awarded by the Revisional Court pendente lite and future till eviction. THIS writ petition by the chief-tenant is directed against order dated 6-4-2000. Revisional Court affirmed the findings of the Trial Court in respect of benefit of Section 20 (4) of the Act to the tenant as well as in respect of material alteration. Accordingly, the only question to be decided in this writ petition is that of sub- letting. Sub-letting is admitted to the petitioner-chief-tenant, however his case is that under the written agreement sub-tenancy was permitted.
(3.) THE tenancy in between the ancestors of the petitioner-chief- tenant and landlord respondent is continuing since before 1958. In the Year 1958, Rameshwar Nath, Advocate, was appointed as receiver over the property of the then landlord owner including property in dispute. On 30-5-1958, receiver entered into an agreement of tenancy with the ancestors of the chief-tenant, i. e. M/s. Babulal Gauri Shanker, true copy of the said agreement is Annexure-1 to the writ petition. In the agreement, it is mentioned that by virtue of order dated 26-10-1957 passed by the Civil Judge and with the consent of all the parties, who are joint owners of the premises, the said agreement was being executed by the receiver on behalf of the owners-landlords. In the said agreement, it was mentioned that tenants had made constructions over the premises from their own money and cost of the said construction amounting to Rs. 6,000/- would be deducted from the monthly rent, which was agreed to be Rs. 100/- per month. It was also agreed that at the time of eviction, tenants would not be entitled to remove any of the constructions made by them. It was also mentioned that tenants would be entitled to make any further addition and construction in the tenanted premises. Under Clause 6, it was specifically provided that tenants should not be entitled to sub-let the premises to any one else. Thereafter, on 9-11-1973, another agreement took place in between Bihari Lal-father of plaintiff, respondent No. 3-Arjun Singh and Remesh Chandra petitioner tenant in chief. When second agreement of 1973 was executed, receiver was no more there over the property in dispute. In the said agreement, it was mentioned that since time of ancestors of Behari Lal, the ancestors of Ramesh Chandra were continuing as tenants of the property in question and that in between the ancestors of both the parties, it was agreed that the tenants could induct any partner in their business or could sub-let the tenanted property or part thereof and that at the time of eviction, tenant would handover the constructions made by him after receiving the market value and tenant would vacate alongwith sub-tenants. Thereafter, it was mentioned that ancestors of both the parties had left for their heavenly abode, however the conditions agreed between them, which were mentioned in the earlier part of the said agreement were acceptable to both the parties and none had any objection to the said conditions. It was further agreed that rent would be enhanced to Rs. 220/- per month w. e. f. 14-5-1973, it was also agreed that landlord would be entitled to evict the tenant only on the ground of default in payment of rent and on no other ground.;