G.R.MAJITHIA, J. - (1.) THIS order will dispose of C.R. Nos. 1117 and 1118 of 1986 whereby the appellate authority reversed the findings recorded by the Rent Controller under issue No. 1 and affirmed it under issue No. 2 and resultantly maintained the order of the learned Rent Controller.
(2.) THE sole question involved in this case is whether Shri Muni Lal took the shop on rent in his individual capacity or in the capacity of a karta of joint Hindu family firm M/s Gurdayal Mal Muni Lal. The petitioner landlady sought eviction of the respondent-tenant (hereinafter referred to as the tenant) for non-payment of arrears of rent in respect of the demised premises. The tenant in the written statement pleaded that the joint Hindu family firm styled as M/s Gurdayal Mal Muni Lal was the tenant. On the first date of hearing, respondent Muni Lal made the tender of arrears of rent but it was not accepted. The landlady insisted that the tenant must make a statement in which capacity he was making the tender. The tenant asserted that he had made the tender in his individual capacity.
(3.) ON the pleadings of the parties, the following issues were framed :- (1) Whether the tenancy was created in favour of firm Gurdayal Mal Muni Lal as alleged ? If so to what effect ? O.P.R. (2) Whether respondent has made a valid tender ? O.P.R. (3) Relief. ;