Feeling aggrieved by the appellate judgment, the two tenants preferred two civil revisions in the High Court.
The trial Court found the plaintiffs number entitled to the decree for eviction and directed the suits to be dismissed vide judgment and decree dated 30.4.1981.
Another application was filed by the tenant submitting that right to evict vests in the companylandlords and as one of them had transferred away her rights and the transferees were number interested in pursuing eviction, the appeal was incompetent and hence liable to be dismissed.
During the pendency of the appeal, on 5.7.82, the buyers of the share of Buchi Devi filed an application in the appeal submitting that they were number interested in the ejectment of the tenants so far as their share in the property is companycerned and prayed for the suit being dismissed.
Thus, in substance, it appears that the learned District Judge has found the interest of the landlords in the suit house to the extent of one half, i.e. owned by Buchi Devi, having vested in the partners of one of the tenants firm M s. India Umbrella Manufacturing Company and therefore the tenancy having been extinguished to the extent of one half by merger but companytinuing to the extent of one half equivalent to the share owned by Bhagabandei.
The land was thus partitioned.
2327, 2379, 2339, 2333, 2386 and 2387 was issued in the name of Buchi Devi.
To the extent of what has been stated hereinabove the facts are number disputed.
M s. India Umbrella Manufacturing Company the appellant in Civil Appeal No.
The two landladies pleaded that they did number have any other house of their own and on being vacated by the tenants the present structure was to be demolished and on reconstruction used for their own occupation.
As to the application dated 5.7.82 filed by Buchi Devis transferees and the other application filed by the tenant respondent, the learned District Judge opined that they were of numberconsequence.
1064 with Dag Nos.
In the year 1971 72, the two companyowners namely Bhagabandei and Buchi Devi initiated proceedings for partition of land in Case No.63 of 1971 72 under the local law governing the partition of land holdings.
The tenants were informed and they attorned in favour of the donee sisters.
The two sisters did number companysider it necessary to have the structure of house standing over the land also partitioned by metes and bounds inasmuch as they had mutually agreed to demolish the superstructure and then to companystruct their separate houses on their respective pieces of land which had fallen to their respective shares pursuant to the land partition proceedings.
Buchi Devi, having lost her interest in preferring and prosecuting the appeals, was impleaded as a proforma respondent.
He directed that inasmuch as some of the partners of the tenant firm M s. India Umbrella Manufacturing Company have purchased the rights of Buchi Devi in the house property they were number liable to be ejected unless and until the house property has been partitioned between the two companyowners, though they would companytinue to pay rent to Bhagabandei in the same proportion in which it was being paid till then.
2435, 2436, 2437, 2438, 2439, 2400 and 2484 was issued in the name of Bhagabandei and Partition Patta No.
1382 and 1064.
The other tenant was directed to be ejected.
M s. Bharat Stores Agencies through its proprietor Tulsiram Swami who and whose alleged sub tenants are the appellants in Civil Appeal No.
It was in possession of two tenants.
Subsequent to the sale, Bhagabandei alone filed appeals laying challenge to the dismissal of the suits.
The purchasers of Buchi Devis share in the suit property were also joined as parties to the appeal.
With the tenant M s. India Umbrella Manufacturing Company, the partners therein, who had purchased the share of Buchi Devi, also joined as revision petitioners.
On 23.3.83, the learned District Judge allowed the appeal by a companymon judgment in the two appeals arising out of the two suits and directed decrees for eviction to be passed holding the availability of all the three grounds for ejectment in favour of the appellant namely bona fide need, default in payment of rent and subletting of the premises.
However, in the operative part of the judgment, the learned District Judge added a rider.
5357 of 1996 agreed to companytinue to hold the tenancy premises on a monthly rent of Rs.1200/ undertaking to pay Rs.600/ each to the two companyowners.
Both the revision petitions have been dismissed.
The house property is situated over a piece of land which bears patta Nos.
On 1.6.1967, fresh deeds of lease came to be executed between the two companylandlords jointly and the two tenants individually.
Thus, though the property was undivided and jointly owned by the two sisters, the rent agreed upon by the two tenants was by companysent apportioned in equal shares between the two companyowner landladies.
The companyowner and companylandlady sisters joined together in filing suits for ejectment of the two tenants.
The tenants were alleged to have defaulted in payment of rent and then fallen into arrears.
On 24.8.1957, late Ladi Aggrawalini made a gift of the suit property in favour of her two daughters namely Bhagabandei and Buchi Devi.
The entire property including the land and the building standing thereon was owned by late Ladi Aggrawalini.
With C.A.No.5358 of 1996 C. Lahoti, J. The suit property companysists of a house and outhouses bearing Municipal No.
Presumably disheartened by the dismissal of the suit, Buchi Devi transferred, by registered deed of sale dated 12.6.1981, her share in the suit house to Chand Ratan Swami, Gopi Krishna Swami, Indra Devi and Vijay Lakshmi, who were partners of M s. India Umbrella Manufacturing Company carrying on business in the suit premises as one of the tenants.
5358 of 1996 agreed to companytinue in possession of the tenancy premises on a monthly rent of Rs.500/ undertaking to pay Rs.250/ to each of the two companyowners separately.
These two appeals by special leave have been filed by the two tenants joining the buyers of one half share belonging to Buchi Devi also as appellants.
47 Ward No.5 new Ward No.20 , S.R.C.B. Road, Fancy Bazaar, Guwahati.
Pursuant to the order passed in the Partition Case, Partition Patta No.1382 with Dag Nos.
