RAM I LAL Vs. GURBAX SINGH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The Civil Revision has been filed against the order dated 26th October, 1977 whereby Shri Ajit Bharihere, Sub-Judge 1st Class, Delhi had dismissed the petitioner-defendant's application under Order 18 Rule 17-A of the C.P.C.

(2.) The plaintiff-respondents had filed a suit for possession against the present petitioner. It was alleged that the petitioner was a legal heir of the deceased Daropadi Devi who had been a tenant under the plaintiff respondents. It was further alleged that the tenancy of the suit premises had been terminated during the life time of Daropadi Devi. The petitioner was in occupation of the suit premises and the suit was filed for possession of the same.

(3.) The petitioner, during the course of the trial, moved an application under Order 18 Rule 17-A Civil Procedure Code for permission to lead additional evidence. In the said application petitioner also wanted to amend his written statement, so as to incorporate a preliminary objection said to arise out of a communication received from the Custodian of Enemy Property. The objection sought to be raisad, was as under: "That the plaintiff is not the owner of the premises and has no locus standi to file the present suit as the management of the propery now vests with the Custodian of Enemy Property for India, Bombay." 4. The aforesaid application was opposed. The Subordinate Judge referred to a decision of a single Judgs of this Court (Dalip K Kapur, J) given to Civil Revision No. 398 of 1975 (Chum Lal v. Sukh Devi and others) and quoted the following observation from the said decision;