VIJAY KUMARI CHOPRA Vs. VARINDER SAREEN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) By way of present petition filed under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner has challenged three separate orders dated 20.10.2016 (Annexure P-8), 25.4.2019 (Annexure P-13) and 8.5.2019 (Annexure P-14) passed by the Rent Controller, Jalandhar whereby applications under Order 1 Rule 10, Order 6 Rule 17 and Order 14 Rule 5 of the Code of Civil Procedure (in short "the Code"), respectively, filed by the petitioner were dismissed.

(2.) Counsel for the petitioner would fairly concede that challenge to order dated 25.4.2019 and 8.5.2019 may survive for consideration only if plea of the petitioner in respect of challenge to order dated 20.10.2016 is accepted by the Court.

(3.) Counsel for the petitioner would argue that Varinder Sareen- respondent No. 1 filed eviction application under Section 13 of the East Punjab Urban Rent Restriction Act, 1949 (in short "the Act") in respect of shop alongwith basement/strong room and staircase forming part of property No. B-II-2481, situated at GT Road, Civil Line, Jalandhar known as Bhagat/Sareen/Leader Building against M/s Leader Jewellers through its partners Sham Sunder Chopra, Vipin Chopra and Amit Chopra wherein Kishore Sareen-respondent No. 2 has been impleaded as a proforma respondent. It is argued that petitioner Vijay Kumari Chopra purchased 25% share in the property in question vide sale deed dated 15.6.2010. It is further argued that as the petitioner became one of the co-sharers/co- owners of building No. B-II-2481 which is a joint property and no partition has ever taken place amongst all the co-sharers, she is entitle to be impleaded as a party in the eviction application filed by Sh. Varinder Sareen. It is further argued that the petitioner filed a suit for partition claiming 1/4th share by metes and bounds and permanent injunction restraining the other co-owners/co-sharers from raising construction and changing nature of the suit property and the same is pending in the Court.