J.V.GUPTA,J - (1.) THIS is tenants' petition against whom eviction order has been passed by both the authorities below. The landlady Smt. Shashi Bala sought the ejectment of her tenant Ram Chand and Khayali Ram vide ejectment application dated 15.4.1980 inter-alia on the ground that the tenants has sub let the premises to Munshi Ram and other respondents No. 3 to 11 in the ejectment application. Originally Radha Krishan was the owner of the premises in dispute who let out the same to the said tenants on 1st April, 196 @ Rs. 30/- per month. Later on Radha Krishan sold the building in question vide sale deed dated 23.6.1978 in favour of Smt. Shashi Bala, who thus became the landlady; and hence filed the present application. In the written statement filed on behalf of the tenants it was denied that they have sub let the premises as alleged. According to the tenants they were in occupation of the demised premises and respondents Nos. 3 to 11 were not in exclusive use as alleged.
(2.) BOTH the authorities below have concurrently found that the tenants are no more in occupation of the demised premises and occupation is that of respondents Nos. 3 to 11. On the basis of that finding eviction order had been passed. Dissatisfied with the same, the tenants have filed this petition in this Court. At the time of motion hearing it was contended that the sublet had taken place before the landlady purchased the demised premises and therefore she was not entitled to eject the tenants on that ground. In support of this contention reference was made to Shantinath S. Ghangade v. Rajmal Uttam Chand Gugale, 1979(1) RCR 701.
(3.) ON the other hand, learned counsel for the landlady has referred to the Division Bench judgment of this Court reported in Pritam Singh Jiwan Singh and others v. Raja Ram Kalu Ram and another, AIR 1964 Punjab 363 wherein it has been held that the transferee from a landlord can claim ejectment of the tenant on the ground of a subsisting sub-lease which was entered into during the time of his predecessor-in-interest so long as the sub-lease took place after the commencement of the Act and without the written consent of the landlord.;