IMPORTANT POINT
The right to apply under Order XXII Rule 10 CPC is a continuing right and can be exercised at any time during the pendency of a suit.

ORDER :

I.A. No. 01/2024:

1. An application has been moved on behalf of the petitioner stating inter alia that due to inadvertent and bonafide mistake in the cause title, the name of Smt. Bhanwari devi has been mentioned whereas Smt. Bhanwari Devi has already expired. While tendering apology, it has been prayed in the application that the name of Smt. Bhanwari Devi may be deleted from the cause title and her name be substituted with the name of her legal representative Shri Sashindra Sukhlecha.

2. For the reasons indicated in the I.A. No. 01/2024, the same is allowed. The amended cause title is directed to be taken on record.

S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 17107/2024:

1. The present writ petition under Articles 226 & 227 of the Constitution of India has been filed by the petitioner being aggrieved by the order dated 12.09.2024, passed by the learned Rent Appellate Tribunal, Bikaner, in Rent Appeal No. 02/2017, whereby the application filed by the petitioner under Order XXII Rule 10 of CPC has been rejected.

2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that an application/petition under Section 9 of the Rajasthan Rent Control Act, 2001 was filed by one Smt. Bhanwari Devi W/o Shri Bhanwar Lal before the Rent Tribunal, Bikaner against the petitioner seeking an order of eviction on the grounds of default in payment of rent and intentional/deliberate damage to the rented premises. The Rent Tribunal, Bikaner vide order dated 29.11.2016, pleased to allow the said application. Being aggrieved by the order dated 29.11.2016, the petitioner preferred an appeal before the Rent Appellate Tribunal, Bikaner.

3. Learned counsel submitted that an application dated 30.11.2021 came to be filed by the respondent informing the Appellate Tribunal that the sole respondent, Smt. Bhanwari Devi had expired on 20.09.2021. In the application, it was further stated that now, as per the Will of the deceased Smt. Bhanwari Devi, Shri Sashindra Sukhlecha is her legal representative in the matter. On receiving the application dated 30.11.2021, a reply thereto was filed by the petitioner on 21.10.2023, stating therein that late Smt. Bhanwari Devi had three living sons and daughters therefore, appropriate orders may be issued for providing a copy of the Will of the deceased as well as the details of her legal heirs/representatives. Thereafter, on receiving the details about the legal representatives, a detailed application was filed for bringing them on record and an application for condonation of delay and setting aside the abatement of the appeal, if any, was also filed.

4. It was contended that during the pendency of the appeal, the counsel appearing on the behalf of both the parties agreed that till the disposal of the appeal, the execution proceedings would not be initiated, however, in the year 2024, the execution proceedings were initiated against the petitioner whereupon, a stay application seeking stay of execution proceedings was filed by the petitioner before the Rent Appellate Tribunal.

5. Learned counsel further urged that an application under Order XXII, Rules 4 and 9 CPC was also filed on behalf of the petitioner. On 01.04.2024, the said application came to be withdrawn and an application under Order XXII Rule 10 CPC was moved by the petitioner stating inter alia that as per the Will of Smt. Bhanwari Devi, assignment, creation and devolution of the interest is in favour of Shri Sashindra Sukhlecha and therefore, he is a necessary and proper party. In the application, it was prayed that Shri Sashindra Sukhlecha be impleaded as party respondent in place of late Smt. Bhanwari Devi.

6. Learned counsel submitted that while rejecting the application filed on behalf of the present petitioner under Order XXII Rule 10 CPC, learned Rent Appellate Tribunal, failed to consider that the right to apply under the aforesaid Rule is a continuing right and therefore the same can be exercised at any time. However, in the present case, the application under Order XXII Rule 10