RAKESH KUMAR Vs. NITIN GARG

JUDGEMENT

(1.) BY way of the present petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner has assailed order dated 3rd November 2012 passed by the learned Appellate Court in an appeal filed by the petitioner against the respondents.

(2.) BRIEF facts for the purpose of adjudication of the present appeal are that respondent No.1 had filed an eviction petition against respondent No.2 under Section 14 (1)(e) read with Section 25B of the Delhi Rent Control Act (hereinafter referred to as "the Act"). The matter was at the stage of petitioner's evidence when the petitioner herein filed an application under Order 1 Rule 10 read with Section 151 CPC for his impleadment as one of the respondents in the eviction petition on the premise that the suit property was taken on lease vide lease deed dated 1 st December 1987 from the previous owner by a firm, namely, M/s New Heavens Colour Lab and that the petitioner was a partner thereof and thus, a co -tenant.

(3.) IN the case of Kanji Manji vs. Trustees of the Port of Bombay, AIR 1963 SC 468, it was observed by the Supreme Court that "Where the tenancy was a joint tenancy, notice to one of the joint tenant was sufficient and the suit against one of the joint tenant not impleading rest of the joint tenants was good and the suit cannot be dismissed on this ground. The plea of the petitioner that the petitioner was separately required to be served personally if therefore not tenable."