URMILA SETH Vs. HARDIP OBEROI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This civil revision petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India has been filed by petitioner-Hemant Seth impugning the legality of order dtd. 9/11/2023 (Annexure P-3), rendered by learned Rent Controller, Jalandhar, vide which apart from petitioner-Hemant Seth, respondents No.2 and 3 namely Shravan Kumar Seth and Geetika being legal heirs have also been impleaded as legal representatives of Urmila Seth (since deceased).

(2.) Learned counsel for petitioner inter alia contended that Urmila Seth (mother of petitioner- Hemant Seth) alongwith respondent No.4-Rajni Seth wife of Hemant Seth, filed petition under Sec. 13 of the East Punjab Urban Rent Restriction Act, for eviction of respondent No.1-Hardip Oberoi from the demised shop erected in House No.249, Harnamdas Pura, Jalandhar, on the grounds of non-payment of rent, material alterations made in the demised shop and thereby its value and utility has materially impaired andbonafide personal necessity. Respondent No.1-Hardip Oberoi filed written statement and contested the above said petition. During the pendency of eviction petition, Urmila Seth expired on 6/10/2023 and petitioner-Hemant Seth, being her son, filed an application for his impleadment as legal representative on the basis of registered Will dtd. 8/12/2010 executed by Urmila Seth (since deceased). It is categorical stand of petitioner- Hemant Seth that by virtue of Will dtd. 8/12/2010, he is the only legal representative to inherit the estate of deceased. Though it was averred in the application that apart from petitioner-Hemant Seth (son), Shravan Kumar Seth (son) and Geetika (daughter) are also legal representatives of Urmila Seth (since deceased), however, by virtue of above said Will, petitioner-Hemant Seth is the only legal representative to represent the estate of deceased. Vide order dtd. 9/11/2023 (Annexure P-3), learned Rent Controller without obtaining any reply from respondent, allowed the application and impleaded all the legal heirs as legal representatives of deceased Urmila Seth, whereas in terms of provisions of Sec. 2(11) CPC, 'legal representative' means a person who in law represents the estate of deceased person and in the present case, though Shravan Kumar Seth (son) and Geetika (daughter) are also legal heirs of deceased, but by virtue of Will dtd. 8/12/2010, the demised premises has fallen to the share of petitioner-Hemant Seth, therefore, he alone should have been impleaded as legal representative of deceased. He further contended that in this scenario, the impugned order is liable to be modified.

(3.) I have heard learned counsel for petitioner and have also gone through the contents of petition especially the documents placed on the record.