LAWS(ALL)-2009-8-290

ALI ZAFAR ZAIDI Vs. RAFIQ @ MITTHU AND OTHERS

Decided On August 13, 2009
Ali Zafar Zaidi Appellant
V/S
Rafiq @ Mitthu Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) BY the impugned order dated 29-8-2008, the court below has rejected the application filed by the petitioner for impleadment in a pending revision, being SCC revision no. 23 of 1999.

(2.) IT appears that one Smt. Lilawati, the predecessor in interest of the respondents no. 2 and 3 herein, instituted SCC suit no. 20 of 1989 in the court of JSCC, Muzaffar Nagar which was decreed on 16-3-1999 for recovery of arrears of rent and ejectment. In the said suit, the plaintiff claimed that she has purchased the property by means of a sale deed dated 28-8-1968. Against the said decree, SCC revision no. 23 of 1999 was filed in the year 1999 by Rafiq, which is still pending decision. When the revision came up for hearing, an application for impleadment was filed by the present petitioner claiming himself as owner and lordlord of the property in question. The said application having been dismissed by the impugned order dated 29-8-2008 with costs of Rs. 5,000/-, the present writ petition has been filed.

(3.) THE petitioner claims himself as owner and landlord of the property in question. If that is so, the remedy of the petitioner is to get his right established through a duly constituted suit. The petitioner cannot be permitted to file an impleadment application in a pending revision claiming his title. Apart from the above, except making a bald statement that he is owner and landlord of the property in question, there appears to be no material on record to show even prima facie title of the petitioner over the property in question. The court below has found that the matter has been pending for the last 8-9 years and is being adjourned for one reason or the other at the instance of the petitioner. Filing of impleadment application has been considered by the court below as a step to delay the disposal of the revision to which this Court agrees. The revisional court has rightly observed that the question of title cannot be decided by a Judge, Small Causes Court in a dispute between landlord and tenant. A Judge, Small Causes Court is competent to decide the relationship of landlord and tenant between the parties.