The death of a statutory tenant does not extinguish the jurisdiction of the Rent Controller, and the proceedings can continue against the legal representatives.

( 1 ) RESPONDENTS after terminating tenancy of their tenant Wasti Ram by notice, filed an application on 5. 9. 70 for eviction under S. 14 (1) of Delhi Rent Act from shop No. 20, New Market West Patel Nagar on grounds : (1) that tenant has sub-let the premises on 1. 2. 70 without obtaining consent in writing, (2) that premises were let for residence but tenant changed the use to commercial purpose, (3) that he has caused substantial damage to property by converting veranda into room and by fixing an iron door in the front portion and raising a brick wall in the back portion, (4) that the petitioners required the premises bona fide for residence, and (5) that the tenant had not paid the rent at the rate of Rs. 1 10 per month and had only paid at the rate of Rs. 108 per month. The Addl. Rent Controller by his order of May 19, 1975 held that the receipt of notice of termination was admitted, and that the premises were initially let out only for commercial purpses. He rejected the contention that any substantial damage has been caused to the premises. As regards subletting he found that Ashok Shorthand Academy is being run in the premises by the tenant Wasti Ram himself with the help of his grandson Ashok Sethi. Kasturi Lal, father of Ashok Sethi, denied that they were tenants and depoed that his son was only helping his maternal grand-father in running the Shorthand Academy. The learned Addl. Rent Controller held, therefore, that no case of subletting or assignment or parting with possession was proved. The ground of bona fide requirement appears not to have been pressed. The learned Addl. Rent Controller however, found that there has been a default in payment of rent of Rs. 24 from 1. 3. 1964 to 28. 2. 1970, which were deducted towards money order fees and of Rs. 90 for September 1970, and of the rent after March 1975. Since the ground of non-payment of rent was made out, he passed an order under S. 15 (6) of the Act directing that if the tenant failed to make the payment then the premises shall be vacated after the expiry of one month.

( 2 ) LANDLORDS went in appeal. The tenant filed cross objection. The learned Rent Control Tribunal by its order dated November 9,1978 allowed the cross-objection and negatived the ground of non-payment of rent. it upheld the Controller s decision regarding other grounds except that of subletting. It noticed that during the pendency of the case, an application was made by the respondent on February 20, 1973, for amendment of the written statement in order to take the plea that there was no subletting to Ashok Sethi. Rather there was a partnership since November 7, 1970, between Kasturi Lal, his father and Wasti Ram. That partnership was running the Ashok Shorthand Academy. That amendment was disallowed and parties could not lead evidence to prove whether there had come about any partnership business in the demised premises. This subsequent event should have been taken into consideration. Thus, the Tribunal gave on finding upon the question of subletting and desired that the Controller should decide this question. It felt that it was all the more necessary because Wasti Ram had died on August 15, 1977, and it was required to be established in whose exclusive possession the demised premises came to be after the death of Wasti Ram. He was survived by the widow and seven children who are already on record. The learned Tribunal therefore, also allowed the appeal of the landlords partly and remanded the case to the Addl. Rent Controller for affording an opportunity to the parties to lead evidence with regard to subsequent events and then to determine whether the shop stood sublet, assigned or its possession was parted with in favour of Ashok Sethi or not. It is against this judgment that this appeal has been filed by the widow of the deceased Wasti Ram. The notice of the appeal was served on March 10, 1970. April 10, 1979, was Sunday. On April II, 1979, the crossobjections were also filed whi