The suit for eviction was dismissed by the Controller and the dismissal was upheld by the appellate authority as also by the High Court in civil revision.
On 29.6.1991, another deed of partnership was signed between respondent No.1, the widow of late Vijay Gautam acting for herself and as guardian of respondent No.2, the minor son of Vijay Gautam, on the one hand and Harbhajan Singh, respondent No.3 on the other hand.
Feeling aggrieved, the landlord has filed this appeal by special leave.
It was let out to late Vijay Gautam under an oral lease.
A ground of default in payment of rent was also taken.
The partnership stood dissolved companysequent thereupon.
On 26.6.1991, Vijay Gautam died.
On 7.7.1992, appellant initiated proceeding for eviction of the respondents from the shop alleging that the tenant Vijay Gautam had sublet the premises to Harbhajan Singh which subletting has been companytinued by the heirs Respondent No.1 2, after the death of Vijay Gautam.
C. Lahoti, J. The suit premises companysist of a shop bearing No.96/1, Lower Bazar, Shimla, governed by the H.P. Urban Rent Control Act, 1987.
The appellant is the landlord cum owner of the shop.
On 31.12.1988, a partnership deed was signed between late Vijay Gautam and Harbhajan Singh, the respondent No.3 herein.
