INDERJIT KALRA Vs. SUBHASH AHUJA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Petitioner, in this case, has filed a petition, under Section 14 of the H.P. Urban Rent Control Act, for eviction of the respondent from certain premises, which he claims to have purchased from Custodian of Evacuee Property. It is also the case of the petitioner, as pleaded in the petition, that after he purchased the share of the custodian, partition has taken place and the portion, from which eviction of the respondent is sought, has fallen to his share.

(2.) Eviction of the respondent, who was inducted as tenant by Custodian of Evacuee Property, prior to the purchase of custodian's share by the petitioner, is sought, on the ground of reconstruction. Respondent is contesting that petition and one of the grounds raised by him is that the petition is bad for non-joinder of the State of Himachal Pradesh, which is alleged to be the owner of the site of the building, in question.

(3.) Rent Controller framed issues, recorded the evidence adduced by the petitioner and when the evidence of the respondent was in the process of being recorded, an application was moved, under Order 1 Rule 10 of the Code of Civil Procedure, for impleading the State of Himachal Pradesh as party. That application has been allowed by the Rent Controller and it is against this order of the Rent Controller that the present petition, under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, is directed.