JAGDISH RAI Vs. PARMINDER SINGH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS revision petition is directed against the judgment of the learned Additional District Judge Ludhiana, dated August 7, 1987, holding that the appeal filed by defendants 2 to 4 in the suit was not maintainable.

(2.) THE facts :-- Parminder Singh, a tenant, filed an interpleader suit under Section 88 of the Code of Civil Procedure (for short the Code) on the ground that two sets of claimants, viz, defendant No. 1 on the one hand and defendant Nos. 2 to 6 on the other, were claiming the rent from him. A declaration was sought from the Court as whom he was bound to pay the rent. The trial Court after entering into the suit observed as under :- "the issues in this case on these pleadings were framed, but I am of the view that, the defendants should be asked to inter-plead between themselves, so as to decide the question of title which is correct procedure to dispose of such suits under Order 35, C. P. C. The learned counsel for the defendants No. 2 to 6 has submitted that the tenant cannot question the title of his landlord during the continuance of tenancy. In the present case, the pleadings would show that the question of title between defendant No. 1 on the one hand and the defendants No. 2 to 6 on the other hand, is involved and both the parties claim title through original owner, i. e. Board of Foreign Mission and not the title of landlord at the commencement of tenancy So it is a fit case where the provisions of Order 35 C. P. C. are applicable About the merits of allegations, the matter has to be adjudicated upon, after the defendants interplead between themselves and rights are decided after giving them opportunities to prove their respective cases Vide detailed order dated 28-5-1985 of this Court, intimation of this suit was also sent to the learned Rent Controller under Order 35, Rule 3, C. P. C. However, as the defendant No. 1 has already filed a suit claiming title to the property in dispute, it is directed that defendant No. 1 shall act as plaintiff in the suit and defendants No. 2 to 6 as defendants Plaintiff shall keep on depositing the arrears of rent in this Court. Title of claim be filed by defendant No. 1 first. "

(3.) DEFENDANTS No. 2 to 4, feeling aggrieved against this order, challenged the same before the first appellate Court. The appellate Court dismissed the appeal as not maintainable.