Indian Kanoon - Search engine for Indian Law

(13) Elaborating his arguments the learned Counsel for the appellants submitted that the findings of the learned Single Judge to the effect that there was no other tenant in the suit premises except defendant No.1 are illegal and contrary to the records of the case. According to the learned Counsel the tenancy rights were created in favor of appellant No. 2 and associate companies were paying the rent 93 through the medium of M/s. Concord International Pvt. Ltd. and were doing the same with the knowledge and consent of Late Bakshi Sachdev, the original plaintiff No. 1. According to him the learned Judge failed to appreciate that even as per the lease deed dated June, 1974 the tenant was described as M/s. Dss Industries Pvt. Ltd. and Associates which necessarily implied that the tenancy devolved not only on appellant No. 2 namely - M/s. Concord International Pvt. Ltd. but also on its associate companies and as such the findings of the learned Judge cannot be sustained.