Indian Kanoon - Search engine for Indian Law

12. The Apex Court in the case of Burmah shell Oil Distributing (supra) in Paragraph 12 has observed thus:

"12. In Rupchand Gupta v. Raghuvanshi (Pvt.) Ltd. Air 1964 SC 1889, it was held by this Court that it is quite clear that law does not require that the sub-lessee need be made a party, if there was a valid termination of the lease. This court reiterated that in all cases where the landlord instituted a suit against the lessee for possession of the land on the basis of a valid notice to quit served on the lessee and did not implead the sub-lessee as a party to the suit, the object of the landlord is to eject the sub-lessee from the land in execution of the decree and such an object is quite legitimate. The decree in such a suit would bind the sub-lessee, but this was a position well understood by him when he took the sub-lease. The law allows this and so the omission cannot be said to be an improper act. In the facts of this case these observations apply more effectively. The termination of the lease was not disputed by the lessee. There is no allegation of any collusion between the lessee and the 10 cra153.11.sxw respondent." (emphasis supplied) The facts in the aforesaid case squarely apply to the facts in the present case.