J.V.GUPTA,J - (1.) THE landlord-Krishan Chand sought ejectment of his tenant-Tara Chand from the demised premises consisting of five rooms that is, two Chobaras, three rooms on the ground floor and kitchen out of house consisting of seven rooms Deohri, Court-yard and two kitchens, which was rented out vide rent noted dated 3.12.1979 on a monthly rent of Rs. 12/-. The ejectment was sought on the ground that Tara Chand-tenant has sub-let a portion of the rented premises to Balwant Singh, respondent No. 2 in the ejectment application. The landlord required the premises for his own use and occupation as he has no other house at Bassi Pathana or any where else.
(2.) TARA Chand tenant in his reply admitted the case as set up by the landlord. He stated that he had rented out the part of the house to Balwant Singh, respondent No. 2 at Rs. 35/- per month and that the said respondent was in arrears since 1.3.1981. On the first date of hearing, Tara Chand tenant tendered Rs. 400/- inclusive of interest and cost from 1.3.1983. The stand taken by Balwant Singh, respondent was that he was a direct tenant under the landlord and he denied the relationship of landlord and tenant i.e. between Krishan Chand Landlord and Tara Chand. According to him, the rent was Rs. 35/- per month and that he was paying rent regularly to the landlord Krishan Chand and sometimes to Tara Chand who is authorised to collect the same on behalf of the landlord. On the first date of hearing, he also made a tender of Rs. 140/- of rent from February, 1983 to May, 1983 which was not accepted by the landlord on the ground that Balwant Singh was not his tenant. In the replication filed by the landlord to the written statement of Balwant Singh, it was denied that he was never let in by the tenant as claimed by him.
(3.) ON the question of sub-letting, the learned Rent Controller, after discussing the entire evidence in detail, came to the conclusion that Balwant Singh has failed to prove himself to be a direct tenant under the landlord and had taken the premises in dispute on rent from Tara Chand tenant. As regards the bonafide requirement of the landlord, the learned Rent Controller found that since the landlord was posted at Bhatinda and was living there no evidence was led to show that he wanted to settle himself and his family at Bassi Pathana where the demised premises are situated. According to the learned Rent Controller, mere statement of the landlord was not sufficient. Consequently, on the question of sub-letting eviction order was passed on 3.2.1986.;