A.S. Sulochana vs C. Dharmalingam on 28 November, 1986
Supreme Court of India in A.S. Sulochana v. C. Dhamalingam, 1987(2) SCC 180, has held that where the sub-letting was not questioned for several years (18 years) by the original landlord and no action for possession was instituted notwithstanding the fact that the sub tenant was in possession of a part of the premises would give rise to an inference that it was never treated to be an unlawful sub-letting. It seems that Kartar Singh was residing in England and he had executed a rent note in favour of Shingara Singh which was a sham and bogus document, never acted upon, created in order to procure the ejectment of the alleged subtenants on the ground of sub-letting. There is no evidence to prove that Shingara Singh was ever put in possession of the shops under the alleged tenancy created in his favour. Silence of ten years after knowing the factum of sub tenancy to get back the possession would indicate that in fact there was no sub-tenancy and the alleged tenancy created by Kartar Singh in favour of Shingara Singh was a sham transaction fabricated in order to procure ejectment of the alleged sub tenants on the ground of sub-letting. The allegation of creation of sub tenancy is not accepted and the findings recorded by the courts below to the contrary are reversed.