RAJ KUMARI Vs. SHIV KUMAR VERMA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard learned counsel for the parties.

(2.) This writ petition is directed against the order passed in the impleadment application filed by the petitioner in the Rent Appeal. It appears that the release application has been filed on 7.2.2000 against three sons of late Phoolgain,the original tenant of the shop in question. It is specifically stated in the release application that the sons of the original tenant are carrying on their business in the shop in question which exists in the premises no. 43/106, Dhobi Mohal, Kanpur Nagar. It is also disclosed that after the death of Phoolgain, the opposite party became joint tenant of the shop in which they are carrying on goldsmith business.This application was contested by the sons of the original tenant but they had lost before the Prescribed Authority, hence, Rent Appeal No. 2 of 2008 was filed.

(3.) In the pending appeal, an application 84-Ga was filed by the wife of Phoolgain, the deceased tenant. on 31.7.2015.The assertion in the application is that now three sons of the original tenant are fighting for the shop in question. In view of this dispute the applicant wife of Phoolgain want to continue her business in the shop in question.. The court below has rejected this application on the ground that Phoolgain the original tenant died on 25.1.1997 and his sons namely, Nem Chandra, Kishan Chandra alias Dabbal and Tek Chandra are carrying on the. business since thereafter.In case there is any dispute between the joint tenants that is immaterial for the purpose of release.Moreover the dispute which is sought to be raised by the wife of original tenant cannot be looked into at this stage.The right of the wife of Phoolgain to continue in the shop in question independently cannot be decided by the Rent Control Authority in the release application.In fact the petitioner-applicant. is trying to change the nature of the dispute which has already been decided by one court i.e. the Prescribed Authority.