Document Fragment View

Matching Fragments

There is nothing in this decision to show that the persons described as men belonging to the defendant were really the lessees of the defendant; much less is there to show that the leases, if any favour were granted before the institutions of the suit for possession of the property. Furthermore, the two decisions of the Bombay High Court relied upon by the learned judge related to decree in ejectment obtained by the lessors against the lessees during the execution of which resistance was offered by the sub-tenants of the lessees. Reliance upon these decisions, therefore shows, if anything, that the learned Judge in AIR 1931 Mad 534 regarded the persons who offered obstruction to delivery of possession in execution of the decree in that case as occupying the position of sub-tenants holding under the judgment-debtor-tenant against whom a decree in ejectment has been passed.

The position of the plaintiff in the instant case is radically different. However, the learned counsel for the respondent contends that if an under-tenant who is not a party to the ejectment suit can be dispossessed in execution of the decree for possession obtained by the head-lessor against the under lessor, the plaintiff in the instant case can also equally well be dispossessed of his leasehold. This argument overlooks the true legal position of a sub-lessee. A sub-lessee's rights will terminate with termination of the lessee's rights. sub-tenancy is a subordinate interest carved out by the tenant and cannot ordinarily outlive the tenancy. It is will come to an end when the tenancy to which it is subordinate determines, except in a case of fraud or collusion between the lessor and the lessee as against the sub-lessee or a case of surrender by the lessee to the lessor behind the back of the sub-lessee and an attempt thereby to derogate from the grant made by the lessee to the sub-lessee. It has therefore been held that in a case where a decree for eviction of the tenant is obtained on a valid and bona fide termination of the tenancy, the sub-tenancy cannot survive that decree and the sub-tenant cannot resist delivery of possession to the decree-holder-landlord, in execution of the ejectment decree. The sub-tenant in such case has been held to be a person bound by the decree within the meaning of O. 21, R. 35.