AKHIL BHARAT HINDU MAHA SABHA Vs. MANAV KUMAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Present revision petition has been filed under Article 227 of the Constitution of India for quashing order dated 19.09.2011 (Annexure P/1) passed by learned Civil Judge (Junior Division), Ambala whereby direction has been issued to the plaintiffs in the suit to deposit the rent in the Court. Brief facts of the case are that the respondents-plaintiffs filed inter pleader suit for decree of declaration declaring either of the defendants as lawful owner or landlord of the building in question and for permanent injunction restraining the defendant, being not lawful owner or landlord, from claiming any rent from the plaintiffs regarding the building in question situated in Punjabi Mohalla, Ambala Cantt. During the pendency of the suit, the petitioner filed an application under Order 7 Rule 11 for rejection of the plaint on the ground that as per law the tenants cannot file any Interpleader suit as per provisions of Order 35 Rule 5 CPC. The trial Court, after hearing the parties, came to the conclusion that since the suit was pending and it was yet to be determined as who was actual landlord and entitled to claim the rent from the plaintiffs, so the Court directed the plaintiffs, who had filed the Interpleader suit, to deposit the rent in the Court and the same was directed to be released in favour of rightful claimant subject to just exceptions, after determination of the issue of entitlement of the rent.

(2.) I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record.

(3.) The only contention raised by the learned counsel for the petitioner is that the petitioner is the landlord as the petitioner has been receiving rent from the plaintiffs against proper receipts vide Annexures P/4 to P/20. Learned counsel for the petitioner further contended that since the petitioner is the only landlord, tenant cannot deny the relationship of landlord and tenant.