KARAN TEXTILES Vs. GAYATRI DEVI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The tenant is the revision petitioner, challenging the order in I.A.No.3 of 2024 in RLTA.No.238 of 2023 on the file of the learned XVI Additional Judge, City Civil Court, Chennai, permitting the subsequent purchaser to be impleaded in RLTA.

(2.) I have heard Mr.Sandeep Shah, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr.P.Chandrasekar, learned counsel for the respondents.

(3.) The learned counsel for the petitioner would challenge the findings of the Rent Tribunal on the ground that the proposed party cannot be impleaded in the appeal proceedings, as there is no cause of action insofar as the proposed party is concerned. He would also state that the proposed party, pursuant to his purchase, has accepted rents from the revision petitioner and therefore, his remedy to seek recovery of possession is lost as a contract comes into existence between the petitioner and the proposed party. He would also state that the Sale Deed in favour of the proposed party is silent about the premises being occupied by the tenant and the rights being made over to the proposed party, namely the purchaser. He would therefore pray for the revision being allowed.