Indian Kanoon - Search engine for Indian Law

4 Oral and documentary evidence was led which included 7 PWs examined on behalf of the landlord and 2 witnesses have come into the witness box on behalf of the respondent of whom RW-2 was Ashok Kumar, attorney holder of Makhan Lal and son of deceased Ram Swarup.

5. The fact findings by the courts below was on the basis of the appreciation of the evidence adduced before it to arrive at a conclusion that no case under Section 14 (1)(b) of the DRCA is made out. Admittedly a petition under Section 14 (C) read with Section 25-B of the DRCA had been filed by the landlord which had been proved in the trial Court as Ex. PW-1/R41; this was qua the same property. Para 14 clearly states that the premises had been let out by Dina Nath Seth to M/s Ram Swarup Makhan Lal and Makhan Lal was paying the rent for the said premises; no rent note or lease deed had been executed; after the death of Ram Swarup by rule of survivorship the tenancy devolved solely upon Makhan Lal; legal heirs of Ram Swarup had been impleaded only by way of abundant precaution. This portion of the eviction petition (Ex. PW-1/R41) had clearly recited that Makhan Lal Ram Swarup were both the co-tenants in the suit property; after the death of Ram Swarup, by the rule of survivorship Makhan Lal had alone become the tenant; this clear admission cannot be lost sight of. Today before this Court also it has been urged that under a mistaken legal advice this petition had been drafted; contention before this Court being that all along the stand of the petitioner is that Makhan Lal had been carrying on the business of halwai under the name and style of M/s Ram Swarup Makhan Lal and he also is the tenant. Learned counsel for the petitioner has vehemently argued that the documentary evidence which included the rent receipts Ex. PW-1/4 and Ex. PW-1/5 show that these rent receipts have been signed by Makhan Lal alone. These documents have been appreciated by the court below. The aforenoted two documents i.e. Ex.PW-1/4 and Ex. PW-1/5 show that the receipts have been issued in the name of 'Ram Swarup Makhan Lal' who has been described as the tenant although both these documents have been signed by Makhan Lal alone. Ex. PW-1/4 is in fact dated 08.07.1965; it is also not in dispute that Ram Swarup had died on 15.06.1965; obviously in this factual scenario, Ex.PW-1/4 which is after the date of 15.06.1965 could not have been signed by Ram Swarup. PW-1 the petitioner in his cross-examination has clearly and categorically admitted that the rent receipts are in the name of Ram Swaropp and Makhan Lal. PW-1 has also admitted that Ex.PW-1/R-41 is the certified copy of the petition filed by him which bears his signatures; this document as noted supra has clearly described both Makhan Lal and Ram Swarup as co-tenants in the said property and as such the submission of the petitioner that Makhan Lal had sub-let these premises to Ram Swarup is clearly an averment without any merit and in this factual scenario findings of both the two courts below holding that no case of sub- letting has been made out under Section 14 (1)(b) of the DRCA in favour of the landlord suffers from no infirmity.