He companytended that Inder Singh, Bhagwan Singh and Rattan Singh, who were the members of a joint Hindu family and were companyarceners,were owners of the factory building in question.
Thereafter on September 8, 1973, the appellant herein filed an application seeking an order under order XXI Rule 100 of the Code of Civil Procedure Code for short alleging that he had been illegally dispossessed in execution of the order for eviction made against Natha Singh and praying for restoration of his possession.
Bhagwan Singh, as one of he members of the said joint Hindu family, let out the factory building to him the appellant on behalf of the joint Hindu family on a monthly rent of Rs 200 on July 10, 1958.
Since then, the appellant companytended, he was in occupation of the disputed premises as a tenant inducted by Bhagwan Singh on behalf of the joint Hindu family and he had been paying rent regularly to Bhagwan Singh who had been issuing receipts.
Facts relevant for disposal of this appeal are under.
The Judgment of the Court was delivered by MUKHERJEE, J. This appeal by special leave is directed against the judgment and order dated July 16, 1984 passed by the High Court of Punjab and Haryana in a second appeal.
One Inder Singh since deceased obtained an ex parte order from the Rent Controller for eviction of one Natha Singh, whom he claimed to be a tenant under him, from a factory situated at Gill Road, Ludhiana and in execution thereof took possession of the premises.
