Judgement

SEN, J. :- The only question involved in this appeal by special leave from the judgment and order of the Allahabad High Court dated February 8, 1985 is whether the appellants were liable to be evicted from the demised premises under sub-s. (2) of S. 20, U.P. Urban Buildings (Regulation of Letting, Rent and Eviction) Act, 1972. By the judgment a learned single Judge has declined to interfere with the judgment and decree passed by the VIIIth Additional District Judge, Ghaziabad dated January 24, 1986 decreeing the suit brought by respondent 1 for eviction of the appellants under S. 20(2) of the Act.

2. First as to the facts. The demised premises which comprises of a godown at Hapur Road, Ghaziabad was an asset belonging to a partnership firm called Messrs Saggu Engineering Works. The firm consisted of three partners, namely, Sardar Meharban Singh, Smt. Prakash Kaur and Sardar Dilip Singh. By a deed of dissolution dated April 1, 1971 executed by the partners, the partnership stood dissolved from that date and respondent 1 Sardar Meharban Singh and Sardar Dalip Singh retired from the firm and finally settled their accounts and in settlement of their accounts it was mutually agreed between the parties that two-thirds share in the land and building at Hapur Road, Ghaziabad from which the business of the firm was carried on shall belong to Smt. Prakash Kaur, the continuing partner, and the remaining one-third portion thereof to the share of respondent 1 and that they would execute the necessary documents effecting such transfer. On October 30, 1973 respondent 1 purporting to act as landlord inducted the appellants as tenants of the godown at a rent of Rs. 460 per month. The appellants paid rent at that rate to him till month March 1986 and thereafter at Rs. 600 per till July 1976. In the meanwhile, Sardar Dalip Singh instituted Civil Suit No. 141/75 in the Court of Civil Judge, Ghaziabad for partition of his one-third share to which both respondent 1 and Smt. Prakash Kaur were impleaded as defendants. That suit of his was dismissed by the Civil Judge by his judgment dated May 23, 1979 holding that according to the agreement between the parties as evident by the aforesaid dissolution deed, Sardar Dalip Singh was paid Rs. 25,000 in lieu of his share. We are informed that Sardar Dalip Singh has preferred a first appeal in the High Court which is now pending.

3. In July 1976 Smt. Prakash Kaur lodged a complaint against the appellants and respondent 1 for criminal trespass, theft, etc. under S. 454 read with Ss. 380 and 506, Penal Code, 1860 in the Court of the Special Judicial Magistrate, Ghaziabad. It was held that under the terms of the dissolution deed, the demised premises had been allotted to the share of Smt. Prakash Kaur. As a result of this, the appellants accepted Smt. Prakash Kaur to be their landlord w.e.f. February 1, 1977 and executed a rent note dated February 14, 1977 agreeing to pay rent to her at that rate from July 1976 to July 1981. Shortly thereafter, Smt. Prakash Kaur filed Civil Suit No. 72/77 against the appellants and respondent 1 for recovery of Rs. 24,000 as damages. It was alleged that respondent 1 contrary to the terms of the dissolution deed had wrongfully let out the premises to the appellants and recovered rent thereof at Rs. 500 per month from October 1973 to June 1976 and therefore she had a right to recover Rs. 24,000 from them by way of damages. She however gave up her claim for damages for the period from October 1973 to February 1974 since the claim for that period had become barred by time and confined her claim for recovery of Rs. 21,000 for the period from March 1974 to June 1976. On April 2, 1977 respondent 1 also brought Civil Suit No. 43/77 in the Court of Additional Civil Judge, Ghaziabad claiming that he was entitled to recover Rs. 4,500 towards arrears of rent from July 1975 to March 1977 i.e. the period for which the appellants had paid rent to Smt. Prakash Kaur. Although the suit bro