R.S.Narula, J.

1. It is the admitted case of both sides that Sarup Singh respondent No. 1 is the owner of the premises, that Sarup Singh had let them out to Gurdip Singh respondent No. 2 and that Gurdit Singh had sub-let them to Joginder Singh petitioner. In December, 1970, Sarup, Singh filed a petition for the eviction of Gurdit Singh and Joginder Singh on inter alia the grounds that Gurdit Singh had sub-let the premises to Joginder Singh without the written consent of the landlord and that the tenant had failed to pay any rent with effect from January 1, 1970. The stipulated rate of rent between Sarup Singh and Gurdit Singh was Rs. 25/- per mensem. It is not disputed that on the first hearing of the petition for eviction neither Gurdit Singh nor Joginder Singh tendered any amount on account of arrears of rent, etc. Gurdit Singh made an unequivocal statement to the effect that the arrears were due, but he was not in a position to pay Joginder Singh claimed to be a tenant of Sarup Singh on the basis of a sub-tenancy with the written consent of the landlord, but stated that he was not liable to pay anything to Sarup Singh as the latter was not acknowledging Joginder Singh as