WAZIR CHAND KHANNA Vs. SHRI RAKHA RAM AGGARWAL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Civil Revision No. 74 of 1977 was allowed by this Court on 2nd February, 1981 and order of ejectment passed by the Rent Controller was restored. Ram Rakha Aggarwal was the sole respondent on whose behalf Shri H.L. Sarin, Senior Advocate, had argued the case.

(2.) On 5th November, 1981 an application (Civil Miscellaneous. No. 4227-C-II of 1981) was filed in this Court by the legal representatives of Ram Rakha Aggarwal for recalling the order dated 2nd February, 1981 on the ground that Ram Rakha Aggarwal had died on Ist March, 1979 and the revision was heard and decided without impleading his legal representatives and therefore, prayed that the earlier decision be recalled and the matter be heard and decided after hearing them. Notice of the application was given to the landlord. On 15th February, 1982 it was ordered that the application for recalling the earlier order would be heard on 18th February, 1982 and in case that application is allowed, main revision petition would be re-heard on merits that very day and the learned counsel for the parties agree to this course being followed. On 18th February, 1982 the legal representatives of the tenant filed Civil Miscellaneous No. 673-C-II of 1982 under order 41 rule 27 of the Code of Civil Procedure for bringing on record document Exhibit R-1, an order of Shri Tarlok Singh, Assistant Settlement Officer, Department of Rehabilitation, Punjab, Jullundur dated 25th November, 1981 by which it was held that Wazir Chand landlord had grabbed some evacuee property which he included in his own house and to contend that Wazir Chand was not owner of the property in dispute and therefore, could not seek eviction. This application was also ordered to be heard along with the main revision.

(3.) After hearing the learned Counsel for the parties in Civil Misc. No. 4227-C-II of 1981, I am of the opinion that the same deserves to be allowed. The aforestated facts equally go to show that when the revision was heard, Ram Rakha Aggarwal, the sole respondent, was dead and his legal representatives had not been brought on record. While it is true that there is no abatement of revision under Order 22 of the Code of Civil Procedure for failing to bring on record the legal representatives, yet the revision cannot be heard in the absence of proper parties and if the sole respondent is dead then the revision can be disposed of on merit only after his legal representatives are brought on record and after affording an opportunity to them. This is the minimum requirement even under the principles of natural justice. Since the revision was heard in the absence of the legal representatives, therefore, I hereby recall the order of this Court dated 2nd February, 1981. The legal representatives of Ram Rakha Aggarwal, the sole respondent, have already come on the record and are represented through their counsel for arguing the main revision on merits pursuant to the order of this Court dated 15th February, 1982. Accordingly I proceed to hear the revision on merits.