Case: Malwa Bus Service Private Limited Vs. Mohinder Kaur

2. Eighty marlas, which is half an acre, of vacant land was rented out by Mohinderto the Malwa Bus Service Private Ltd., a transport company, the appellant herein. On July 27, 1979 an eviction petition was moved by theant and one Amar Singh, who is not a party herein, but was a party in the courts below, on the allegations that a portion of the rented land had been sublet by the tenant in favour of Amar Singh, described as theThe other ground of eviction was bona fide requirement for personal use and occupation. The Rent Controller as well as the Appellate Authority held both grounds to be unsubstantiated which led the landlord to move the High Court in revision. The High Court allowed the eviction petition on the ground ofand this is how the case is before us

Court's reasoning:
Relief to the landlord on such statement of the(who is not a party to the instant proceedings) was granted against both the tenant as also theNow here lies the error. The High Court was perfectly justified in using that statement againstBut it is difficult to conceive that the said statement could be used against the tenant too. It is true that theas also the tenant, had denied the existence of theant stands falsified on account of his earlier statement if his earlier statement if his earlier statement is trustworthy. Be that as it may, the High Court in the facts and circumstances obviously was in error in ordering eviction of the appellant herein on the basis of the said statement of Amar SinghWe have thus no option but to allow the appeal and set aside the order of eviction. Accordingly we do so