1973 entered into between Respondent and the said Banwari Lal of ,Royal Star Tailors Ex.
Appellants, in support of their allegation of sub letting relied, particularly, on the Report and evidence of Sri S.K. Chhabra, Advocate Court Commissioner A.W.I who in his report substan tially companyroborated appellants charge of sub letting of Ram Lal Malhotra A.W. 2.
Dr. Y.S. Chitale, H.K. Puri and Ashok Jain for the Respondents.
L. Sanghi, S.K. Mehta, M.K. Dua, S.M. Tandon, P.N. Puri,R. Jagannath Goulay and Aman Vochher for the Appellants.
Respondent carries on a business in clothing and textiles under the name and style ,Saree Sansar in the demised premises.
The respondent also produced and relied upon the agreements dated 13.9.
1982 of the Punjab and Haryana High Court in Civil Revn.
The Judgment of the Court was delivered by VENAKATACHALIAH, J. This Appeal, by Special Leave, by the Landlord arises out of and is directed against the Judgment and Order dated 23.9.
From the Judgment and Order dated 23.8.
Some documents were marked and relied upon in evidence on appellants side.
1982 of the High Court of Punjab and Haryana in Civil Revision Application No.
R. Surinder Mohan R.W. 5 the tailors son Swatantar Kumar R.W. 6 a partner of M s. Kwality Restaurant Parveen Jain R.W. 7 who was examined to companytradict A.W. 8 in regard to the time at which the photographs Ext.
Respondent examined, amongst others, Rajinder Kumar W. 2 stated to be an attestor of Exhibits Mark A and Mark B M.L. Sharma R.W. 3 a Senior Architect, in Chandigarh administration who produced the Plans at Ext.
One was a tailor, a certain Banwari Lal, who carried on his business under the name and style Royal Star Tailors and the other.
Rent was initially Rs.3,000 per month subject to certain increases stipulated in the lease deed.
who spoke about the nature and extent of the alleged sub letting and of the exclu siveness of the possession of the sub tenants of the portions in their respective occupation and certain other matters and of Kul Rajinderlal A.W. 8 who took photographs Exhibits AW 8/1 to 4 which are stated to disclose that the Ice Cream Parlour was open late in the night even after the respondents textile business had been closed.
15, Sector 17 E, Chandigarh, granted a lease, under deed dated 25.11.1970, in favour M s. Chokesiri Co., respondent fierein.
those other points do number survive.
My one hand was near the mouth.
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION Civil Appeal No.
2588 of 1980, allowing the Respondent tenants appeal and in reversal of the companycurrent findings of the companyrt below that there was an unauthorised sub letting dismissing Appellants application under Section 13 of the East Punjab Urban Rent Restriction Act, 1949 Act for an order for grant of possession.
AW 8/1 to 4 were taken Baldev Raj R.W. 8 the Manager of M s. Kwality Restaurant Krishan Lal R.W. 9 an employee of M s. Kwality Ice Cream and Des Raj Jain R.W. 10 a partner of the respondent firm.
The lease was for a term certain of 10 years from 1.
Mark B and dated 17.9.1973 between the Respondent and the said Agia Ram Lamba of M s. Kwality Restaurant Ex.
1.1971 under the terms and on companyditions particularised in the Deed.
There were other grounds for eviction one of them that there were unauthorised structural alterations but having regard to the limited scope of the proceedings before the High Court.
Mehtab Singh Gill, the second appellant, tendered evidence as A. W. 9.
4077 of 1982.
2588 of 1980.
and Inspector in the Enforcement Office who spoke to the numberice stated to have been issued by the authorities in regard to the partitions effected in the premises to accommodate the Tailor and the Ice Cream Vendor or Ravinder Pal Singh A.W. A customer of the Ice Cream Parlour who spoke about the exclusiveness of its possession, of Nirmal Singh A.W. 5 who gave a similar account respecting the tailoring establishment of Davinder Singh A.W. 7 , the husband of the first appellant and father of the second.
Mark A the terms of which, according to the respondent, clearly excluded any possibility of sub letting.
