SHAM SUNDER, J. - (1.) THIS revision petition was filed by Ghansham Dass, tenant revision-petitioner, who died during the pendency of the same, and his legal representatives were brought on record, vide order dated 23.3.2006, against the order dated 9.12.1985, rendered by the Appellate Authority, vide which the appeal against the order dated 29.07.1983 of the Rent Controller, Moga, was dismissed. Balwant Rai, respondent-landlord also died during the pendency of the revision-petition, and his legal representatives were brought, on record, vide order dated 24.11.1989.
(2.) BALWANT Rai (now deceased), landlord, inducted Ghansham Dass( now deceased) as tenant, in the demised premises, as fully detailed in the head note of the ejectment application, at a monthly rental of Rs. 12/-. The ejectment of the respondents was sought, on the grounds, that Ghansham Dass (now deceased) tenant, had not paid the arrears of rent w.e.f. 1.10.1976, that he changed the user of the demised premises, without the written consent of the landlord; and that he sub-let the same in favour of Naresh Kumar @ Nathu and Kasturi Lal without the written consent of the landlord. On the final refusal of the respondents (tenant and sub-tenants), to hand over the vacant physical possession of the demised premises, to the landlord, left with no alternative, an application under Section 13 of the East Punjab Urban Rent Restriction Act, 1949, was filed. The respondents, namely, Ghansham Dass and Naresh Kumar @ Nathu, put in appearance, in the Court,. Ghansham Dass and his son Naresh Kumar @ Nathu, respondents, filed a joint written statement, wherein, they admitted the creation of tenancy, in respect of the demised premises, and rate of rent. It was denied that Ghansham Dass sublet a portion of the demised premises, in favour of Naresh Kumar @ Nathu and Kasturi Lal. It was also denied that the tenant had changed the user of the demised premises. The remaining grounds of ejectment, were specifically denied being wrong. However, on the first date of hearing, the arrears of rent, were tendered, and accepted by the landlord under protest.
(3.) KASTURI Lal, in his written statement, admitted that Ghansham Dass sub-let a portion of the demised premises, in his favour, at a monthly rental of Rs. 50/-. He further stated that he and Naresh Kumar son of Ghansham Dass were jointly running the business of sale of cloth, soda water etc. in the demised premises. 4-A Thereafter, Kasturi Lal did not appear, and was proceeded against ex- parte.;