Vijay Singh vs Dharam Pal and Others

J.V. Gupta, J.—This revision petition is directed against the order of the Rent Controller dated June 15, 1987, whereby the application filed by Vijay Singh, petitioner, under Order 1 Rule 10, Code of Civil Procedure, praying that he may be made a party to the ejectment application filed on behalf of Dharam Pal against Chet Ram as he was a necessary party there to. The Learned Rent Controller found that the petitioner Vijay Singh was not entitled to be impleaded as a party to the ejectment proceedings as he was setting up a title in the demised premises and the remedy was to file a civil suit, if any.

The Learned Counsel for the petitioner submitted that since the petitioner had interest in the demised premises and was in occupation thereof, he was a necessary party to the ejectment proceedings.

I do not find any merit in this contention. The landlord has sought the ejectment of the tenant Chet Ram. The mere fact that the petitioner Vijay Singh claims himself to be in occupation of the demised premises does not entitle him to be party to the ejectment application. In case he claims any title therein, he will be well advised to file a ''separate civil suit, if any, in that behalf.

Consequently, this revision petition fails and is dismissed with costs. Since further proceedings in the petition were stayed at the time of the motion hearing on September 21, 1987, the parties have been directed to appear before the Rent Controller on January 25, 198.9.