RSA 95/2016

1. This Regular Second Appeal under Section 100 of CPC is filed by the appellant/landlord impugning the concurrent judgment of the Courts below i.e. of the trial Court dated 1st October, 2014 and of the First Appellate Court dated 6th November, 2015 by which prayers by the appellant/plaintiff for declaration, mandatory injunction and permanent injunction have been declined.

2. I have heard Mr.Brijendra Kulshrestha, Advocate for the appellant and Mr.Sanjeev Sindhwani, Senior Advocate for the respondents.

3. Mr.Brijendra Kulshrestha, learned counsel for the appellant has contended that the premises was let out for residential purpose to the Managing Director Sh.R.C.Agarwal (D-1) and the rent was paid by the AGSONS Agencies (I) Pvt.Ltd. (D-2). As the rent can be paid on behalf of the tenant by any other person/company but it does not have the effect that the person/company making the payment becomes the tenant. Another contention raised on behalf of the appellant is that if the Company was a tenant, then a board resolution authorizing the Company to take the premises on rent for commercial use must have been passed. The Company being a juristic entity, cannot act by