JUDGMENT

T.H.B. Chalapathi, J.

1. One Fakira who is the landlord filed a suit for ejectment of the tenant Khem Chand, the petitioner in this writ petition Under Section 77 of the Punjab Tenancy Act, 1887. The grounds taken by the landlord for ejectment of his tenant are two fold:

i) the tenant failed to pay rent and fell in arrears of rent;

ii) the tenant sublet the premises.

on these two grounds, the Assistant Collector who was acting as revenue Court under the provisions of the Punjab Tenancy Act, ordered eviction of the petitioner on the ground of default in payment of rent. The appellate authority also held that there was subletting apart from default in payment of rent and confirmed the order of eviction passed by the Assistant Collector. The further revisions filed by the tenant were unsuccessful. Hence this writ petition by the tenant to quash the order of eviction.

2. Admittedly, the suit was filed for eviction in a revenue Court under the provisions of the Punjab Tenancy Act. Sections 39 and 40 provide the grounds for ejectment of a tenant. Under Section 39 of the Punjab Tenancy Act a Tenant can be evicted only on the following grounds:-

(a) that he has used the land comprised in the tenancy in a manner which renders it unfit for the purposes for which he held it;

(b) where rent is payable in kind, that he has without sufficient cause failed to cultivate that land in the manner or to the extent customary in the locality in which the land is situate;

(c) when a decree for an arrears of rent in respect of his tenancy been passed against him and remains unsatisfied.

3. Under Section 40, the grounds of eviction are as under:-

(a) that he has used the land comprised in the tenancy in a manner which renders it unfit for the purpose for which he held it;

(b) where rent is payable in kind, that he has without sufficient cause failed to cultivate that land in the manner or to the extent customary in the locality in which the land is situate;

(c) on any ground which would justify ejectment under the contract, decree or order.

4. Default in payment of rent of subletting the premises is not a ground of eviction either Under Section 39 or Under Section 40 of the Punjab Tenancy Act, 1887. Therefore, no suit possibly be filed Under Section 77 for ejectment of the tenant on the ground of non-payment of rent or subletting. Every non-payment of rent is not a ground. If the landlord obtains a decree for arrears of rent against the tenant and that decree remains unsatisfied then only the landlord can seek eviction of his tenant Under Section 39(c) of the Punjab Tenancy Act. The revenue court while trying the suit Under Section 77 of the Act has to find out whether the grounds mentioned in the application for eviction have been made out. The grounds of eviction which were sought to be relied by the landlord are not the grounds mentioned either in Section 39 or Section 40 of the Punjab Tenancy Act. Therefore, the revenue Court Under Section 77 of the Act has no jurisdiction to order eviction of the tenant for non-payment of rent of for sub-letting.

5. Non-payment of rent or sub-letting are the grounds for eviction of a tenant under the Punjab Security of Land Tenures Act, 1953. The said Act of 1953 provides for an application to be made for ejectment of the tenant on the grounds mentioned in Section 9 of the said Act. Section 14(A) which has been inserted by way of amending Act 1956 lays down the procedure for disposal of the application filed for eviction of the tenant. But admittedly no application Under Section 14(A) of the Punjab Security of Land Tenures Act, 1953 has been made for eviction of the tenant. The revenue Court acting under the Punjab Tenancy Act also has no jurisdiction to order the eviction of the tenant on the grounds mentioned in the Act of 1953. It is the authority who has been prescribed in the Punjab Security of Land Tenures Act, 1953 alone who has the jurisdiction to order the eviction of the tenant on the grounds mentioned in Section 9 of the Punjab Security of Land Tenures Act. Therefore, the order of eviction passed by the revenue Court acting under the Punjab Tenancy Act, 1887 is without jurisdiction and liable to be set-aside on that ground alone.

6. The learned counsel for the respondents contended that the revenue Court acting Under Section 77 of the Punjab Tenancy Act can certainly order eviction of the tenant on the grounds mentioned in Section 9 of the Punjab Security of Land Tenures Act. He relied on a decision of this Court in Rallu v. The Additional Financial Commissioner, etc, I.L.R. (1960 (Pb.) 247. It is not clear from the said decision that on what grounds the landlord sought the eviction of the tenant. In the said decision, it is only said that it is open to the landlord to take proceedings either under the Punjab Tenancy Act or under the Punjab Security of Land Tenures Act, and that the remedies available to him are parallel and it is open to him to avail of either remedy.

7. There is no dispute in regard to the above-said proposition. While seeking the remedy under the Punjab Tenancy Act the landlord must satisfy that there existed the grounds of eviction as enumerated in Sections 39 and 40 of the Punjab Tenancy Act, 1887. It is further clear from the above decision that it is open to the tenant to state that he is protected from eviction because of the provisions contained in the Punjab Security of Land Tenures Act, 1953 and it is for the landlord as observed in the above decision that such protection as given under 1953 Act was not available to the tenant and therefore, there was no hinderance in ordering the eviction under the Punjab Tenancy Act on the grounds of eviction enumerated Under Sections 39 and 40 of the Punjab Tenancy Act. The Revenue Court under the Punjab Tenancy Act has no power of ordering eviction on the grounds mentioned in Section 9 of the Punjab Security of Land Tenures Act because a separate procedure and separate authority have been prescribed under the Punjab Security of Land Tenures Act, 1953 for ordering eviction of the tenant Under Section 9 read with 14-A of the Act 1953. The learned counsel for the respondents also relied on a decision of this Court in Gangal Singh v. Financial Commissioner, Haryana reported in, 1980 P.LJ. 123. It is observed therein as follows:-

" xx xx Mr. Sarin is right to the extent that the suit Under Section 77 of the Punjab Tenancy Act on the grounds mentioned in Section 9 of the Act was competent."

But there was no discussion on the subject. The learned Single Judge agree with the authorities below that there was no default in payment of rent. Therefore it is not necessary for the learned Judge to observe that the suit under the Punjab Tenancy Act is maintainable. The observation quoted above is only an obiter. On the facts of the case it was clear that the tenant had already paid the rent, he was not in arrear of rent and it was not necessary for the learned Single Judge to make the observation that suit under the Punjab Tenancy Act on the grounds mentioned in Section 9 of the Act was competent. Therefore, the said decision is not binding on me. The learned counsel for the respondents further relied on a decision in Lakshbir v. Anant Ram & ors., 1971(1) ILR Punj 1, (1.969)71 P.L.R. 35 (S.N.) and contended that it was not necessary for the landlord to give reasons for ejectment of a tenant and even in the notice for ejectment to the tenant Under Sections 43, 44 and 45 of the Punjab Tenancy Act, 1887 there is no need to specify an reason for ejectment but that does not mean that the revenue court under Punjab Tenancy Act has jurisdiction to order eviction of the tenant on the grounds mentioned in Section 9 of the Punjab Security of Land Tenures Act, 1953.

8. On a careful reading of the decision in Lakshbir v. Anant Ram and Ors. (supra) I am therefore, of the opinion that the said decision is not applicable to the facts of the present case.

9. In view of the foregoing discussion, the order of eviction passed by the authority below is liable to be quashed for want of jurisdiction. Accordingly the writ petition is allowed and the order of eviction is hereby quashed. However, it is open to the landlord to seek eviction of the tenant on any grounds mentioned in Section 9 of the Punjab Security of Land Tenures Act after making an application to the prescribed authority Under Section 14-A of the Punjab Security of Land Tenures Act. There will be no order as to costs.