JUGAL KISHORE Vs. BHAGWAN DASS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This petition is directed against the order of the trial Court dated 4-10-1988 whereby the preliminary issue with regard to the maintainability of the inter-pleader suit has been decided against the defendant Jugal Kishore.

(2.) Bhagwan Dass tenant filed the present inter-pleader suit with the submissions that Jueal Kishore defendant No. 1 transferred his rights in respect of the demised premises through a civil Court decree in favour of defendants Nos. 2 and 3. After the said transfer, the defendants Nos. 2 and 3 filed a petition under S.4 of the Haryana Urban (Control of Rent and Eviction) Act, against the plaintiff and the rent was fixed at Rs. 80/- per month by the Appellate Authority vide its judgment dated 8-9-1987. The plaintiff then received a registered notice dated 11-12-1987 from defendants Nos. 4 to 19 claiming themselves to be the owners of shop in dispute and alleging Jugal Kishore defendant No. 1 to be their agent and Manager and he was having no right of ownership over the shop in dispute. They further claimed that future rent of the shop . in dispute be not paid to defendants Nos. 1 to 3. On the other hand, defendants Nos. 1 to 3 are claiming themselves to be the owners of the shop in dispute and, therefore, the plaintiff being ignorant regarding the rights of the defendants filed the present inter-pleader suit to decide as to who is entitled to receive rent from him. According to the plaintiff-petitioner he is ready and willing to pay the rent of the shop in dispute as may be directed by the Court. The suit was contested by defendants Nos. 1 to 3. They pleaded that they are the landlords and the plaintiff is a tenant under them. Defendants Nos. 4 to 19 were having no right to issue any notice to the plaintiff for payment of rent to them. Since the plaintiff has not denied the relationship of landlord and tenant between the plaintiff and defendants Nos. 1 to 3 and, therefore, the plaintiff was bound to pay rent to them and he has no locus standi to file the present suit.

(3.) Defendants Nos. 4 to 19 in their written statement claimed themselves to be the owners of the shop in dispute and denied the rights of defendants Nos. 1 to 3 and prayed that defendants Nos. 4 to 19 be declared as owners of the shop in dispute and defendants Nos. 1 to 3 be restrained from collecting any rent of the shop in dispute from the plaintiff and he be further directed to give rent to them. One of the preliminary issues framed was "whether the suit of the plaintiff is not maintainable in the present form? OPD".