RADHAKISHAN TEMPLE Vs. SUB-DIVISIONAL OFFICER AND RENT CONTROLLER, SIHORA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS is a petition under Article 226 of the Constitution for quashing the order of allotment in favour of respondent No. 2 in respect of a house belonging to the petitioner, i.e., Shri Radhakishan Temple, Sihora, the landlord.

(2.) THE petition came to be made in the following circumstances. One Vishnuprasad, a tenant of the premises in question, created a sub -tenancy in favour of respondent No. 2, Dayal Chand, without the written consent of the landlord as required by clause 12 -A of the Madhya Pradesh Letting of Houses and Rent Control Order, 1949. The landlord, therefore, applied for and obtained an order from the Rent Controller to determine the tenancy of Vishnuprasad. He then filed a civil suit (civil suit No. 4 -A of 1957) for his ejectment, in which he also joined respondent No. 2, the sub -tenant, as a party defendant.

(3.) HE contends that there was an error apparent on the face of the record, when the House Allotment Officer held that the house in question was 'available for occupation' within the meaning of clause 24 -A of the M.P. letting of Houses and Rent Control Order, 1949 as soon as the tenancy of Vishnuprasad was terminated by a valid notice to quit, and, that therefore it was available for the occupation on the date of the allotment order.