Tenants cannot challenge the landlord's title in eviction proceedings; only the landlord-tenant relationship is relevant under the Chhattisgarh Rent Control Act, 2011.

ORDER :

Amitendra Kishore Prasad, J .

1. By way of this petition, the petitioner/tenant seeks to challenge the order dated 8.1.2026 (Annexure P/1) passed by the Chhattisgarh Rent Control Tribunal, Raipur in Miscellaneous Appeal No.20/2025. The petitioner further seeks the allowance of his application under Order 1 Rule 10 of the CPC, whereby he has sought leave to implead the legatees/beneficiaries of the ‘Will’ dated 12.8.1997 as necessary and proper parties.

2. The petitioner has prayed for the following reliefs in the petition :

“(i) That this Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to call for the entire records concerning the case of the petitioner from the possession of the Courts below for its kind perusal.

(ii) That this Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to set aside/quash the impugned order dated 8.1.2026 (Annexure P/1) passed by learned CG Rent Control Tribunal, Raipur in Misc. Appeal No.20/2025 and consequently allowing application under Order 1 Rule 10 of CPC of the petitioner, permit him to implead the legatee/ beneficiaries of the Will dated 12.8.1997 as necessary party to the suit.

(iii) That this Hon'ble Court may also kindly be pleased to grant any other relief deemed fit in the facts and circumstances of the case to the petitioner including cost of the petition.”

3. Brief facts of the case are that deceased respondent - Manish Sharma (now represented by respondent-Jyoti Sharma) filed a suit under Section 12(2), Schedule II of the CG Rent Control Act, 2011 (in short “the Act”). The deceased-respondent averred that he owned property at Sadar Bazar, Ward No.39, Raipur (Shop No.538/1 to 4, Old No. 11/536 to 11/539), which is about 80 years old. The respondent purchased the said property from the legal heirs of late Abed Ali and his wife late Jahra Bai Bee through different sale-deeds and obtained possession thereof, a fact well within the knowledge of the petitioner/non-applicant. The petitioner/non-applicant had originally taken on lease two ground floor shops and one first floor hall from Abed Ali and Jahra Bai at a monthly rent of Rs.4000/-, where he has since been conducting business. After the demise of Abed Ali on 10.6.1974 and Jahra Bai Bee on 7.2.1998, the respondent/applicant, through his counsel, issued a registered notice dated 9.3.2018 to the petitioner seeking vacant possession of the suit premises and payment of outstanding arrears. However, despite expiry of six months from the date of receipt of the said notice, the petitioner failed to vacate the premises or clear the arrears, which led to filing a suit before the Rent Controller, Raipur, by the respondent. The petitioner, in his written statement, denied the averments in the plaint and contended that he has been conducting business under the name and style of ‘Shanti Metal Stores’ since 1971. He was originally inducted as a tenant by Abed Ali S/o Gulam Abbas at a monthly rent of Rs.150/- pursuant to a ‘Leave and License Agreement’ dated 15.12.1970. The petitioner further asserted that he has maintained and repaired the suit premises at his own expense and holds the electricity connection in his own name. The petitioner further contended that no rent agreement was ever executed with the respondent, thereby disputing the existence of a landlord-tenant relationship. During pendency of this suit, the petitioner filed an application on 8.8.2025 under Order 1 Rule 10 of CPC, averring that late Zehra Bee had bequeathed the property to Shafina, Salma Bee, Jainam Bee, Sara Bee, Nafisa, Sugra Bee, Asgar Ali, and Farida Bee through a ‘Will’ executed on 12.8.1997. The Rent Controller, Raipur, upon ex