M PERIASAMY Vs. C S GOVINDASAMY

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS revision is directed against the order passed by the appellate authority refusing to implead the revision petitioner who is an allottee. C.M.P. Nos. 14238 and 14239 of 1987 were filed by the persons to whom the building in question was subsequently allotted, for impleading them as parties in the revision.

(2.) THE facts which are necessary for the disposal of the revision-petition are briefly as follows: THE revision petitioner was allotted the petition mentioned premises by the Accommodation Controller, Madras. Fair Rent for the building was originally fixed by the Rent Controller at Rs.350 per mensem on the application filed by the first respondent landlord. When the matter was taken to the High Court, Madras in C.R.P. No.1280 of 1979, it was set aside and the same was remanded back to the Rent Controller for fresh disposal. THEreafter after due enquiry, the Rent Controller re-fixed the fair rent at Rs.633 per mensem. THE Accommodation Controller preferred the appeal. THE revision-petitioner who is the allottee sought to implead himself in the appeal as a party on the ground that it is he who has to ultimately pay the rent that may be fixed and if the fair rent is beyond the scope of the Tamil Nadu Buildings (Lease and Rent Control) Act, the allottee will have to vacate the building and seek accommodation elsewhere.

(3.) IN the result, the revision petition and both the miscellaneous petitions fail and stand dismissed. However, in the circumstances of the case, there will no order as to costs.