SNEH LATA Vs. SUDARSHAN LAL PURI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Having heard the learned counsel for the parties, I find that the impugned order cannot be sustained. The Rent Controller dismissed the application filed by the petitioners under Order 22, Rule 4 of the Code of Civil Procedure on the ground that the same is barred by time. The Rent Controller ignored the amendment to Order 22, Rule 4 of the Code of Civil Procedure published in Punjab Government Gazette on 11.4.1975. Sub-rule (3) added to rule 4 of Order 22 by this Court vide amendment published in Punjab Government Gazette on 11.4.1975 reads as under :-

(2.) In view of the aforesaid provision, legal representatives of the respondent were competent to make an application to come or record before decision of the rent petition. The contention of learned counsel for the respondent that Order 22, Rule 4 of the Code of Civil Procedure as amended by this Court does not apply to the proceedings under the Rent Act has no merit. It is true that Code of Civil Procedure as such has not been made applicable to the Rent Act but at the same time principles of the Code do apply to the rent proceedings. Accordingly, revision petition is allowed and the impugned order is set aside. The trial Court is directed to bring on record the legal representatives of deceased-Tilak Raj. No costs.