The contention based on the ground of bona fide requirement by the landlord is personal to the statutory tenant and is not open to his legal representatives.

A.D.Kaushal, J.

1. This petition for revision of the orders of the Controller and the Appellate Authority directing eviction of the sole tenant Chaman Lal from the residential building in dispute on the ground that the same was bona fide required by Amrit Kaur, the landlady, for her own occupation, was originally filed by the tenant himself who it is admitted on all hands, was what is known as a statutory tenant but who, died during the pendency of the petition. He left behind him surviving 5 sons, 2 daughters and a widow, all of whom were substituted as petitioners as Chaman Lals legal representatives, in acceptance of an application made by them. Their learned counsel Mr. Sarin, however, now contends that the petition should be dismissed as having abated. In support of his contention reliance is placed by him on Baldesh and another v. Smt. Shanti Devi, 1972 PLR 320, wherein I laid down the following two propositions of law :

(a) The right to remain in occupation of certain premises as a statutory tenant is personal to that tenant and if his eviction has been ordered by a decree, the decree cannot be regarded as one which could be executed against the legal representatives or which they have a right to challenge.

(b) The heirs of a statutory tenant have no right to be substituted for him as his legal representatives.

2. If this decision holds the field, the contention raised by Mr. Sarin is unexceptionable but I am afraid, it is no longer good law (except in so far as it states that the right to remain in occupation of certain premises as a statutory tenant is personal to that tenant) in view of the decision of their Lordships of the Supreme Court in J.C. Chatterjee and others v. Sri Kishan Tandon and another, 1972 RCR 675 : AIR 1972 S.C. 2526. In that case also the landlord claimed ejectment of a statutory tenant on the ground that the former required the house in dispute bona fide for the residence of himself and his family. His claim was decreed by the first Court but negatived in appeal. He filed a second appeal in the Rajasthan High Court, during the pendency of which the tenant died and his widow and children were brought on the record as his heirs and legal representatives. The widow also died before the second appeal was heard, leaving behind her children as her heirs who were already on the record as legal representatives of the tenant. The High Court accepted the appeal. In a third appeal filed by the children of the tenant it was contended that they were entitled in their own right to urge that the landlord did not require the premises reasonably and bona fide and that, on the other hand, if they could not be regarded as tenants, no decree of eviction could be passed against them. Repelling both the contentions their Lordships observed :

"It is now settled that after the termination of the contractual tenancy the statutory tenant has only a personal right to continue in possession till evicted in accordance with the provisions of the Act.

"It is obvious that the appellant landlords right to proceed with the appeal with a view to obtain possession of his premises did survive under Order 22, Rule 4 read with Rule 11, Civil Procedure Code. Where the right to sue and prosecute the appeal survives, the appellant is bound to cause the legal representatives of the deceased respondent to be made a party and proceed with the appeal. Therefore, the heirs and legal representatives of the aforesaid B.N. Chatterji were rightly brought on record and the appeal had to proceed.

"Under sub-clause (ii) of rule 4 of order 22, Civil Procedure Code, any person so made a party as a legal representative of the deceased respondent was entitled to make any defence appropriate to his character as legal representative of the deceased respondent. In other words, the heirs and the legal representatives could urge all contentions which the deceased could have urged except only those which were personal to the deceased.

Therefore, the on