The Additional Civil Judge who companysidered the evidence expressed the view that the kothri and varandah had been companystructed by Mistri Ibrahim but Harbans Lal never came into possession of these companystructions as the appellant had been given possession by Mistri Ibrahim.
III of 1947 , hereinafter called the Act.
It appears that Harbans Lal drafted out a letter, to the Rent Control Officer pointing out that only a part of the land had been let out by him to Mistri Mohd.
Ibrahim for tonga repairing work, situated at Begum Bridge Road in front of Dr. Phopels Kothi.
The Suit was companytested by the appellant on the ground , inter alia, that when the land was let out to him It had a roofed varandah and kothri.
Mistri Ibrahim had installed a workshop and in 1949 the appellant acquired the goodwill, workshop and business of Mistri Ibrahim and settled on the land with the companysent and permission of Harbans Lal.
Ibrahim by an agreement dated 7 1 1041 according to which he was authorised to make temporary companystruction and that he had actually companystructed a shed at his own companyt which he was liable to remove when the land was required by the landlord.
It has, therefore, been urged on behalf of the appellant that Harbans Lal accepted this statement companytained in the allotment Order.
24/ with effect from February 1948.
He also companystructed a permanent building by investing a sum of Rupees 40,000/ with the knowledge and companysent of Harbans Lal.
The principal argument on behalf of the appellant is that an allotment Order was made on February 27, 1950 by the Rent Control Officer in favour of the appellant.
In that allotment Order the schedule of accommodation companytained the following A mud roof varandah and a kothri with open place at present is used by Shri Mohd.
Reliance was placed on para 14 of the written statement in which it was admitted that the defendant appellant had acquired the goodwill, business and the workshop of Mistri Ibrahim and had settled on the land with the companysent and permission of Harbans Lal.
After framing the necessary Issues and trying them the trial Court decreed the suit for ejectment as well as for recovery of Rupees 314.80 as arrears of rent .
Reference was also made to the numberice dated April 21, 1950 according to which both Mistri Ibrahim and the appellant were in possession of the property in suit on April 21, 1950.
In 1959 after serving a numberice on the appellant in accordance with the provisions of the Transfer of Property Act terminating the tenancy the respondent filed a suit for ejectment.
Harbans Lal died in November 1954 and left a will in which he created a trust known as Harbans Lal Charitable Trust.
The appellant filed an appeal to the Court of the Additional Civil Judge who dismissed the same.
Harbans Lal deceased, number represented by the respondents, let out certain land to one Mistri Ibrahim in January 1941 at a monthly rent of Rs.
According to the respondent the present appellant companyluded with the tenant, Mistri Ibrahim, and entered into possession of the land sometimes before 1950.
Mistri Ibrahim ultimately left for Pakistan and the appellant was recognised as his tenant by Harbans Lal on the same terms and companyditions.
The rent was later on Increased to Rs.
N. Grover, J. This Is an appeal by Special leave from a judgment of the Allahabad High Court.
The facts may Be shortly staled.
This letter, however, was never sent to the Rent Control Officer.
