SUDHIR KUMAR GUPTA Vs. VARSHAWATI SHARMA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner filed a petition under section 14(l)(e) read with section 25 B of the Delhi Rent Control Act for eviction of the respondents. Mr. Jagan Nath Sharma was the original tenant with respect to the premises in dispute. According to the petitioner the tenancy of Jagan Nath Sharma was terminated vide notice dated 5.3.1984. Jagan Nath Sharma died on 16.8.1985. The present petition was filed in March 1988. At the outset it was pointed out by the counsel for the respondents that Dharam Dev @ Pappi, respondent No.3 in the petition died about three months back. It is not disputed that. the said Dharam Dev died unmarried and did not leave behind any heir of his own. In these circumstances the learned counsel for the petitioner made a statement at the Bar giving up the said respondent.

(2.) The learned Additional Rent Controller dismissed the petition vide impugned judgment dated 30.10.92 holding that the tenancy of deceased Jagan Nath Sharma had not been terminated during his life time and, therefore, all the heirs of deceased Jagan Nath Sharma should have been impleaded as respondents. It was further observed in the impugned judgment that "it is incumbent on the petitioner to file a fresh petition impleading all the legal heirs of the deceased as tenant in the premises". The petition was disposed of accordingly. Aggrieved by the said order the petitioner has filed the present petition.

(3.) According to the learned counsel for the petitioner the notice dated 5.3.1984 terminating the tenancy of Jagan Nath Sharma had been duly served on him and, therefore, the decision of the trial court to the contrary is not correct. In this connection the learned counsel for the petitioner has first drawn my attention to the plea of the respondents in the written statement in this connection. In para 19 of the written statement it has been stated as under-