RAMESH KUMAR Vs. SURAJ BHAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Suraj Bhan filed a petition under Section 13 of the Haryana Urban (Control of Rent and Eviction) Act, 1972, for short the 'Act', against Madan Lal and Bal Mukand. The petition was allowed by the Rent Controller and an order of eviction was passed. Appeal thereagainst is pending before the appellate authority. Ramesh Kumar, Vikram and Vikki sons of Ram Sarup, alleging themselves to be the real tenants under Suraj Bhan filed a suit for declaration to the effect that they are in possession of the shop in dispute as a tenant at the rate of Rs. 87.50 per month and that Madan Lal and Bal Mukand have no right or interest in the tenancy. It is the further case of the petitioners that they were not impleaded as respondents in the application under Section 13 of the Act.

(2.) Plaintiffs also moved an application seeking temporary injunction against the defendants restraining them from interfering in their possession over the suit property. The trial Court by order dated July 26, 1993 dismissed the application after coming to the conclusion that the Landlord cannot be restrained from pursuing the legal remedy and that it will not be proper to stay execution of the order of the Rent Controller. Appeal thereagainst was dismissed by the learned Addl. District Judge, Bhiwani by order dated August 5, 1994. Hence this revision at the instance of the plaintiffs.

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