JUDGMENT

SHARMA, J. :— This appeal by special leave arises out of a suit filed by the appellants for eviction of the respondent-tenant (hereinafter referred to as the Corporation) from certain premises on Lalbazar Street, Calcutta, on the ground of sub-letting. The City Civil Court, Calcutta, decreed the suit, but on appeal by the tenant-Corporation, the Calcutta High Court reversed the judgment and dismissed the suit.

2. Admittedly the defendant-Corporation was inducted as a tenant under a registered deed of lease dated 23-4-1948 for a period of three years from 01-05-1948. After expiry of the period in 1951, the Corporation continued in possession, and by holding over became a month to month tenant. The premises consists of a big room, described as room No. 3, along with a small room for the use of a Darwan (porter), staying there as guard. The big room was, from time to time, leased out by the tenant-Corporation in portions to different sub-tenants and in 1960 the landlord brought a suit, registered as Ejectment Suit No. 978 of 1960, for the eviction of the Corporation on several grounds including sub-letting. In the meantime West Bengal Premises Tenancy Act, 1956 had been enacted, and the provisions of S. 13(l)(a) which are in the following terms, were relied on by the parties :

"S. 13. Protection of tenant against eviction. (1) Notwithstanding anything to the contrary in any other law, no order or decree for the recovery of possession of any premises shall be made by any Court in favour of the landlord against a tenant except on one or more of the following grounds, namely :-

(a) where the tenant or any person residing in the premises let to the tenant without the previous consent in writing of the landlord transfers, assigns or sub-lets in whole or in part the premises held by him; ........."

3. The tenant-Corporation contended that it was permitted to create sub-leases under clause 6 of the lease document which is quoted below and it cannot, therefore, be accused of sub-letting without the consent of the landlords :-

"That the lessees shall use the demised premises as office in connection with their business and shall be entitled to sublet the portion which may not be used by them."

It was asserted on behalf of the tenant-Corporation that all the sub-tenants had been inducted in the premises in question in pursuance of the aforesaid permission and before the expiry of the lease period in 1951. The City Civil Court decided the issue in favour of the tenant-Corporation on the ground that all the sub-tenancies had been created within the period covered by the lease deed and before coming in force of the West Bengal Premises Tenancy Act, 1956. The suit was held to be not maintainable also on the ground that a legally valid notice terminating the tenancy had not been served on the tenant. The suit was thus dismissed on 30-08-1962 by the judgment Ext. B(2).

4. The present suit was filed in 1972 alleging that the tenant-Corporation has, without the consent of the landlords, created fresh sub-tenancies in the premises in favour of other sub-tenants after the dismissal of the earlier suit. The case is that after the original lease exhausted itself by efflux of time, and otherwise also came to an end by the landlords notice terminating it, the general permission under clause 6 of the lease deed, mentioned above, also disappeared. Alternatively the appellants have contended that even assuming that the term in clause 6 continues to bind the parties, it does not authorise the respondent-Corporation to sublet the entire premises. The dominant purpose of the lease was actual user by the tenant itself for the purpose of running its office and clause 6 permitted it to sub-let only such portion which was left unused as surplus. The appellants have also alleged default of payment of rent, but the plea has been rejected by the trial court and has not been pressed before us.

5. The suit was defended by the respondent-Corporation contending that as