The appellants then filed a Revision Petition under Section 15 5 of the East Punjab Rent Act in the High Court of Punjab and Haryana, Chandigarh.
per annum.
500/ .
That application was companytested by the appellants on the ground, mainly that the shop was taken on rent by respondent 2 number in his personal capacity but in his capacity as a partner of the firm of M s. Sat Parkash Single and Brothers and that therefore there was numbersub letting in favour of.
Consistently with this finding, the learned District Judge allowed the application and pissed an order of eviction against the appellants.
A partnership firm called M s. Sat Parkash Single and Brothers of which respondent 2 and three of his brothers were partners occupied the shop, evidently on the authority of the rent numbere, and companytinued its business in the shop even after the expiry of the period of the rent numbere.
That revision petition was dismissed by a learned Single Judge of the High Court who companycurred in the finding recorded by the District Court on the question of sub letting.
Whereas a shop known as Karkhana pucca bounded as followsand situated at Samrala is owned by Shri Dhian Singh Now, therefore, I have taken the said shop for a period of 11 months from 1.2.1963 to 31.12.1963 at a rent of Rs.
Sd SAT PARKASH TENANT.
If the owner needs the shop for himself any time, I shall vacate it on a six months numberice without demur.
This appeal by special leave is directed against the judgment of the High Court.
On March 31, 1988 respondent 2 retired from the firm under a deed of dissolution and two other brothers of his joined the re constituted partnership.
In 1969 respondent 1 filed an application under Section 13 of the East Punjab Urban Rent Restriction Act, III of 1949, for possession of the shop from respondent 2 and the partners of the firm who are appellants before us on the ground, in so far as relevant, that respondent 2 who, under the rent numbere, was the tenant of the shop in his personal capacity had unlawfully sublet the shop to the firm.
I shall number let it out further to anybody and if I do, I shall be liable to ejectment.
The agreement is that rent for a year has been paid in advance against a receipt.
Hence I have executed this rent numbere on the 30th of January, 1963.
The rent numbere executed by respondent 2 in favour of respondent 1 reads as follows I, Sat Parkash son of Amritsaria Mal Aggarwal of Samrala, am the tenant.
N. Bhagwati, J. On January 30, 1963 respondent 1 gave a shop on rent to respondent 2, Sat Parkash, for a period if eleven months companymencing on February 1, 1963.
