(1.) The revision is against the order of eviction issued against the tenant in rent control proceedings initiated under the Hayana Urban (Control of Rent and Eviction) Act of 1973. The contention of the landlord was that the tenant had stopped paying rent from November, 1986 till September, 1989 when the petition for eviction was filed. The landlord was contending that the rent payable was Rs. 200/-, while the contention of the tenant was that the rent payable was only Rs. 75/-. He also contended that he had not been in arrears of rent, but having regard to the fact that such proof of payment was not available, the tenant tendered at the first hearing the rent @ Rs. 75/- per month for the period of complaint of nonpayment. The Rent Controller, however, found that the rent that was payable was Rs. 200/- per month and found that the tenant had committed short tender of rent and directed eviction. The judgment of the Rent Controller was approved by the appellate authority as well.
(2.) During the time of pendency of appeal, it appears that the landlord had died and the legal representatives had been brought on record before the appellate authority. However, when the certified copy of the order was issued, it appears that the copy had not incorporated the names of the legal representatives and the tenant filed a revision before this Court treating the landlord as still alive. When this fact was brought to the attention of the Court that the revision had been filed again a dead person, the tenant had filed an application in CM No.17719-CII of 1999 for amending the cause title to take the appeal instituted against the legal representatives.
(3.) Even before the arguments got underway in full throttle, the learned counsel for the respondents would contend that the revision itself is not maintainable and the actual legal representative who ought to have been brought on record, is still not on record.