( 1 ) THIS is an appeal by the defendants from a judgment of P. B. Mukharjee, J. , which was passed on 10th July, 1950, decreeing the landlords' suit for possession.

( 2 ) THE point involved in the appeal is a short one, namely, whether the defendants come within the mischief of Section 11 (1) (b) of the Rent Control Act of 1948 (hereinafter for the sake of convenience referred to as 'unlawful subletting ). It. is admitted on behalf of the parties by their counsel that the Act of 1948 governs the rights of the parties in this case.

( 3 ) THAT section (inter alia) provides that a tenant is deprived of the protection of the Act where he"has sublet, or otherwise transferred his interests in the premises for more than six consecutive months and to the extent either of the whole or a major portion of the premises, in the absence of any contract or other authority in writing expressly permitting such subletting or transfer. "

( 4 ) THE facts of the case are as follows: The plaintiffs (landlords) are owners (being the trustees) of premises No. 3, Bolai Dutt Street in he town of Calcutta, which is a partly three storied and partly four storied house. The premises were let t