HARI NARAIN MITTAL Vs. DARSHAN LAL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS revision petition is against the judgment/order dated 19.2.1992 of the Additional District Judge, Ambala with their application for bringing on record legal representatives of the deceased appellant Abhey Kumar has been dismissed and consequently it was held that the appeal stands abated.

(2.) BRIEFLY stated, the plaintiff-respondent sought a decree for possession or a house on the plea that he purchased the same vide sale-dead dated 19.7.1961. Hari Narain had rendered some financial help and so he was given power to recover the rent from the tenants and to set off the amount recovered against the amount due from the plaintiff-respondent. It was further the case of the plaintiff that the whole liability stood discharged. Since Abhey Kumar was inducted as a tenant in the house in question who had also been paying rent to Hari Narain was served with a notice to contest the right of the plaintiff to seek eviction.

(3.) THE application was opposed by the plaintiff-respondent on the ground that all the legal representatives of the deceased have not been brought on record. Subsequently, it came to light also that Neena, a daughter of Abhey Kumar had neither been arrayed as a respondent nor application was filed on her behalf and so the plaintiff sought dismissal of the appeal on this ground alone.