Dalip Singh and Others vs Kaur Chand and Others

J.V. Gupta, J.—This is the Defendants'' second appeal against whom the suit for possession has been decreed by both the Courts below.

Puran Chand was the owner of the shop, in dispute Later on, he sold the tame to Kaur Chand vide tale deed dated April 30, 1985. Meanwhile, Ajit Singh, the tenant thereon, died leaving behind his widow, sons and daughters. The Plaintiff filed the present suit on October 21, 1972, against them and the brother of the Dalip Singh who was in occupation of the shop, in dispute, alleging them to be the trespassers thereon after the death of Ajit Singh, tenant According to him Ajit Singh, was a statutory tenant and on his death, the tenancy came to an end as it was not heritable. In the written statement the plea taken was that the tenancy was for the joint Hindu family comprising of Ajit Singh and the Defendants and that the said Ajit Singh acted as the Karta of the family. It wag further pleaded that the relationship of landlord and tenant existed between the parties and that the civil Court had no jurisdiction to try the suit. The trial Court found that Ajit Singh was a statutory tenant and that the tenancy was rot for the point Hindu family comprising of Ajit Singh and the Defendants, as alleged. It was also found that the statutory tenancy as such was not heritable. Consequently, the Plaintiff''s suit was decreed vide judgment and decree dated February 13, 1975. In appeal, the learned District Judge affirmed the said findings of the trial Court and, thus, maintained the decree passed in favour of the Plaintiff Dissatisfied with the same, the Defendants have filed this second appeal in this Court.

The only question involved in this appeal is: whether the statutory tenancy of Ajit Singh was heritable or not ?

That matter stands concluded by the Division Bench judgment of this Court in Gordan Dass v. Dhan Mala Devi (1984) 86 P.L.R. 703, wherein reliance has been placed on the Supreme Court decision in Damadilal and Others Vs. Parashram and Others, . It was held therein that the statutory tenancy was heritable. In Gordhan Dass''s cast (supra) it was observed that once the heirs of a deceased tenant inherited tenancy rights under the East Punjab Urban Rent Restriction Act, they became tenants under the Haryana Urban (Control of Rent and Eviction) Act, 1973 and that they were liable to be ejected from the premises under the said Act and not under a decree of the civil Court. To the same effect is the law laid down in Letters Patent Appeal No. 1421 of 1982 (Swami Someshwarananda Udasi v. Darshan Singh L.P.A. No. 1421 of 1982), decided on October 17, 1984. However, on behalf of the Plaintiff it was urged that in any case Dalip Singh, being the brother of Ajit Singh, deceased, could not claim himself to be his heir under law and his plea that the shop was taken on rent for the joint Hindu family business was negatived by both the Courts below In any case, argued the learned Counsel, the son of Ajit Singh, deceased, named Gurcharan Singh was never working on the shop, in dispute, along with his father, and, therefore, he could not claim himself to be the heir of the statutory tenant However, on behalf of the Appellants, it was pleaded that Dalip Singh, though brother of Ajit Singh, deceased, had been doing business in the shop, in dispute, along with the deceased and, therefore, he was entitled to continue as such In support of the contention, reliance was placed on Manmohan Nath v. Smt. Kesra Devi 1986 (1) R.C.J. 437.

I have heard the learned Counsel for the parties. In view of the authoritative pronouncement made by the Supreme Court in Damadi Lal''s case (supra), and by this Court in the cases noticed in the earlier, part of this judgment it can be no longer be disputed that the statutory tenancy is heritable That being the, position, the heirs of Ajit Singh, deceased, inherited the tenancy rights on his death. However, Dalip Singh is his brother. His plea that the business was joint Hindu family business has been negative by both the Courts below. In that situation, only the legal heirs of Ajit Singh, deceased, could claim themselves to be the statutory tenants after his death and not his brother Dalip Singh, Defendants

With these observations, this appeal succeeds and is allowed. The judgments and decrees of the Courts below are set aside. The Plaintiffs suit is dismissed with no order as to costs.