TEJMAL Vs. LEGAL REPRESENTATIVE OF CHANDMAL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This petition is directed against order dated 27.8.18 passed by the Rent Tribunal, Bhilwara, whereby an application preferred by the petitioner for impleading him as party respondent in the petition filed by the respondent-landlord against the tenant, the second respondent, has been dismissed.

(2.) Precisely, the case set out by the petitioner was that he is occupying the shop as owner on the strength of registered sale deed and the respondent-tenant has denied the factum of the shop being taken on rent from the father of the respondent-landlord and thus, his rights are likely to be affected by decision of the rent petition.

(3.) Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner contended that there exists a serious dispute between the petitioner and the respondent-landlord regarding the ownership of the property in question. The respondent-tenant has denied landlord and tenant relationship and therefore, it is absolutely necessary to implead the petitioner as party respondent in the petition. Learned counsel submitted that in the earlier petition filed, the respondent-landlord had impleaded the petitioner herein as party respondent and therefore, the factum of petitioner being necessary party is not otherwise disputed.