Interest of deceased tenant held to be represented by the sub-tenants.

ORDER :- The respondents 2 to 4 in H.R.C. No. 3036 of 1976 before the XII Judge, Court of Small Causes, Madras, are the petitioners in this civil revision petition, which arises out of an application filed by the respondent herein for an order of eviction against the petitioner and another. According to the case of the respondent, he is the owner of premises bearing door No.133, Moore Street, Madras-1 and that one S.M. Hussain alias Hallaj (the first respondent in H.R.C. 3036 of 1976) occupied the entire first floor portion thereof excepting a room as a tenant on a monthly rental of Rs. 215/- exclusive of electricity charges. The further case of the respondent was that Hussain alias Hallaj retained only one room for his own use and occupation and sublet the other portions to the petitioners and the fifth respondent in the application for eviction and that the sub-lessees are in the occupation of the respective portions paying rent to Hussain alias Hallaj. It was also the case of the respondent that Hussain alias Hallaj failed and neglected to pay the monthly rent of Rs. 215/- from 1-1-1974 to 31-7-1976, amounting to Rs.6,691/- and that a registered notice dated 24-8-1976 was issued to Hussain alias Hallaj and also the petitioners demanding the payment of arrears of rent and also vacant possession of the entire portion of the premises in their occupation. In response to this, according to the respondent, Hussain alias Hallaj sent a cheque for Rs.500/- only, and promised to vacate the premises within three months thereafter, but did not do so. Thereupon, the respondent filed an application for eviction on the ground that Hussain alias Hallaj had wilfully committed default in the payment of rents even after the issue of notice dated 24-8-1976, and that the petitioners and the 5th respondent in the application for eviction are sub-tenants and they are also not entitled to remain in possession of the premises.

2. Hussain alias Hallaj, the first respondent before the Rent Controller, contended that he was the chief tenant of the premises and that no wilful default in the payment of rents had been committed by him. It was also his further plea that the rents had been regularly paid, but not given credit to and that the landlord had also filed a suit in O.S. 9033 of 1976 City Civil Court, Madras, and obtained a decree on 30-3-1977. The inability to pay the rents was attributed to the irregularity in the payment of rents to him by the petitioners and the 5th respondent in the application for eviction. Ultimately, Hussain alias Hallaj prayed for four months' time to vacate the premises. The petitioners herein who figured as respondents 2 to 4 before the Rent Controller claimed that they are the direct tenants of the respondent herein and not the sub-tenants under Hussain alias Hallaj and that they were paying the rents regularly to the respondent for which no receipts had been issued and, therefore, there was no question of any wilful default in the payment of rents.

3. During the pendency of the application for eviction, Hussain alias Hallaj, vacated the premises in his occupation some time in Sept., 1977, and also later died on 20-7-1978 leaving behind him his sons and daughters. The respondent nevertheless continued the proceedings as against the petitioners and the fifth respondent in the application for eviction.

4. Before the Rent Controller, the respondent examined P.W.1 and marked Exhibits P.1 to P.20, while the petitioners relied upon Exts.R.1 to R.14, and examined R.Ws. 1 and 2 in support of their case. Before the Rent Controller, an objection was also raised by the petitioners that the eviction proceedings cannot be continued as against them. On a consideration of the oral as well as the documentary evidence, the Rent Controller found that Hussain alias Hallaj had wilfully defaulted in the payment of rents and that the petitioners are only the sub-tenants of Hussain alias Hallaj and not the tenants directly under the re