J.V.GUPTA,J - (1.) THIS is landlord's petition whose ejectment application has been dismissed by the Appellate Authority vide its order dated 3rd February, 1986.
(2.) THE landlady Mrs. Balram Kaur sought the ejectment of her tenants Messrs Parkash Cloth Store through Sh. Ram Parkash, proprietor, from the demised premises i.e S.C.F. No.3, Sector 23-C, Chandigarh, by filing an ejectment application dated 17th November, 1982. According to the landlady, the premises were let out to Ram Parkash on a monthly rent of Rs. 550/- excluding water and electricity charges. He had no authority to sublet the whole or any part of the demised premises to any person without the written consent of the landlady. However, after the commencement of the East Punjab Urban Rent Restriction Act, without the written consent of the landlady and in violation of the terms of the tenancy, the tenant sublet a room on the back side of the ground floor to Messrs Joga Tailors and similarly has sublet the entire first floor of the building in dispute to respondent No. 4 i.e. Messrs Friend Studio through Shri Madan Lal, who was using the same for the purpose of his residence as well as for developing and printing of films. Both these sub-tenants have independent to access to her respective premises. Hence the tenant was liable to ejectment. The stand taken by the tenant in the written statement was that he was inducted as a tenant in the premises much prior to the coming into force of the East Punjab Urban Rent Restriction Act, which came into force on 4th November, 1972. It was denied that he has sublet the premises to respondents 3 and 4 as alleged. It was pleaded that respondent No. 4 from the year 1971 is carrying on his business under the name and style of Messrs Friends Studio in the rented house situated on the ground floor of SCF No. 4, Sector 23-C, Chandigarh, and therefore, it was wrong that the first floor of the building was sublet to respondent No. 4 as alleged. It was further pleaded that a room on the back side of the shop was given to Kartar Singh, the proprietor of Messrs Joga Tailors as a licensee prior to the coming into force of the Act and, therefore, the tenant did not incur any disqualification on that account. Earlier the Rent Controller vide order dated 15th June, 1983, ordered ejectment as the tenant failed to lead any evidence on appeal by the tenant, the report was sent from Rent Controller who found that the landlady had not been in a position to prove subletting as alleged in favour of respondents 3 and 4. The finding in the said report was affirmed by the Appellate Authority vide impugned order, dated 3rd February, 1986, and consequently ejectment application was dismissed.
(3.) LEARNED counsel for the landlady-petitioner submitted that Joga tailor-respondent No. 5 in this petition and Yugraj tailor were different and separate entities and, therefore, the findings of the authorities below that premises were let out to Joga tailor prior to the enforcement of the Act was wrong and illegal. The burden was on the tenant to prove that Messrs Joga Tailors were in occupation of the premises prior to the enforcement of the Act which they have failed to prove by any cogent, evidence. In any case, argued the learned counsel, no such case was set up by the tenant in the written statement and, therefore, no such finding could be given in their favour. The tenant failed to produce their account-books and, therefore, presumption should be raised against them in this behalf. In support of this contention, he referred to 1981(2) R.C.J. 98. It was also contended that the finding of the authorities below that Joga tailors were the licensee and not the sub-tenant, was wrong and illegal.;