DAL CHAND Vs. RAJ RANI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS Petition has been filed under Article 227 of the constitution of India to impugned the order dated 23rd November 2007 passed by the learned Additional rent Controller Delhi whereby the petitioner's application under Order 1 Rule 10 cpc filed for impleadment as a party Respondent in eviction Petition no. 493/07/05 filed by the Respondent herein has been dismissed.

(2.) THE father of the petitioner Late Shri Bihari Lal was the original tenant in respect of the suit premises. The Respondent is the successor in interest of the original landlord. The Respondent filed the eviction Petition impleading one of the sons of Late Shri Bihari Lal, namely, Rajpal as the Respondent. This petition was filed in the year 2005. While the eviction proceedings were progressing, the petitioner filed an application under Order 1 Rule 10 CPC seeking impleadment on the ground that he is one of the legal heirs of the deceased tenant and has therefore succeeded to the tenancy rights alongwith other legal heirs of the deceased tenant. This application was filed only on 18th September 2007 on the ground that the petitioner became aware of the pending eviction proceedings in the month of September 2007.

(3.) THE case of the petitioner is that he is too, apart from his brother Shri rajpal, is residing and also carrying on his business from the suit premises. By the impugned order this application has been rejected by learned Additional Rent controller. The Additional Rent Controller has accepted the contention of the respondent landlord that Rajpal was the only person who started paying rent to the Respondent landlord after the death of the father/tenant Shri Bihari Lal in the year 1990. Therefore, there was an implied surrender of tenancy right in favour of Shri Rajpal. The learned Additional Rent Controller has relied upon the written statement filed by Shri Rajpal wherein he admitted that he has inherited the shop after the death of his father and started paying rent to the respondent landlord.