SUBHASH CHANDER Vs. BAIJ NATH AGGARWAL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS revision petition arises from the order of the Rent Controller dismissing an application filed by Shanti Devi and others under Order 1 Rule 10 of the Code of Civil Procedure claiming themselves to be the legal representatives of Mohan Lal deceased.

(2.) BAIJ Nath Aggarwal filed petition under Section 13 of the East Punjab Urban Rent Restriction Act, 1949 (for short 'the Act') against Manohar Lal Sethi and others for their ejectment from the premises as detailed in the petition. Shanti Devi etc. moved an application under Order 1 Rule 10 C. P. C. alleging therein that the shop in question had in fact been rented out to Manohar Lal Sethi by her deceased husband Mohan Lal It was thus pleaded that she being the legal heir of Mohan Lal was liable to be impleaded as a party to the petition for ejectment.

(3.) BAIJ Nath Aggarwal repudiated the stand of the applicants. He asserted that there was no relationship of landlord and tenant between Mohan Lal, and Manohar Lal Sethi and others. He went on to contend that he was landlord qua respondents.