- (1.) This is second appeal by defendant No. 1 M/s. Bharat Petroleum Corporation Ltd., having remained unsuccessful in both the courts below. Respondents No. 1 and 2 Rajiv Chopra - as adopted son of Roop Rani and Raj Kumari - as daughter of Roop Rani, both claiming to be her natural heirs as well as successors-in-interest on the basis of registered Will dated 18.01.1977 executed in their favour, filed suit against defendant No. 1- appellant and against proforma respondents No. 3 and 4 as defendants No. 2 and 3. The plaintiffs alleged that their predecessor Roop Rani leased out the suit land to predecessor of defendant No. 1 for 20 years since 01.07.1961. Lease period was extended for another 20 years up to 01.07.2001. Plaintiffs served notice on defendant No. 1 to vacate the disputed plot and to hand over vacant possession thereof to the plaintiffs on expiry of lease period. However, defendants failed to do so. It was pleaded that defendant No. 1 had sub-let the disputed land to defendants No. 2 and 3. Plaintiffs accordingly sought possession of the suit land and also claimed consequential relief of permanent injunction.
(2.) Defendant No. 1 admitted that its predecessor had taken the suit land from Roop Rani and consequently, defendant No. 1 stepped into the shoes of the lessee/tenant. It was admitted that initial lease period was for 20 years since 01.07.1961 and the same was extended by another 20 years up to 30.06.2001. It was, however, denied that plaintiffs are lessors or landlords of the disputed land. They are not admitted to be legal representatives of Roop Rani and they failed to prove so in ejectment petition filed by Roop Rani herself, who died during the pendency thereof. It was also alleged that defendants No. 2 and 3 are licensees of defendant No. 1. It was also pleaded that according to the lease deed, defendant No. 1 could even sub-let the property.
(3.) Defendants No. 2 and 3 also pleaded similar version as that of defendant No. 1.;