Back
1998 Supreme(MP) 853
Tej Shankar, J.
Ram Vilas Gupta v. Kishorilal
Civil Revn. No. 1081 of 1998 (G); Decided on 3.11.1998.*
S.B. Gupta for applicant.
Headnote:Civil P.C., 1908 -- O.1 R.10 - suit for arrears of rent and ejectment -- third person claiming to be tenant -- neither necessary nor proper party.
flfoy izfdz;k lafgrk] 1908 && vk-1 fu- 10 && HkkM+s dh cdk;k rFkk csn[ky fy, okn && ijO;fDr }kjk vfHk/kkjh gksus dk nkok && u vko‘;d i{kdkj gS vkSj u leqfpr i{kdkj gh gSA
This revision petition is directed against the order dated 4.7.98 passed by Shri Kamar Iqbal Khan Eighth Civil Judge Class-2, Gwalior whereby he rejected the application filed by the applicant purporting to be under order 1 rule 10 CPC.
Learned counsel for the applicant contended that respondent No.1 filed a suit against the respondent No.2 claiming that the respondent No. I was his tenant. The suit was for arrears of rent and ejectment.
Petitioner filed an application for impleading party alleging that he was a tenant in the accommodation in dispute which has been rejected by the impugned order. Learned counsel for the petitioner during the course of the argument argued that in his statement before the Court, the plaintiff had admitted the fact that actually the petitioner was tenant, the Court, therefore, committed an error in rejecting the application.
I have considered the contention. It is not disputed that the suit was filed by the plaintiff on the basis of contract of tenancy claiming that the respondent therein was a tenant. It is settled law that once the petitioner, failed to establish that there was a contract of tenancy as claimed, the plaintiff can not succeed. If it is established as a fact from the material on record that third person is tenant the plaintiff too cannot succeed on the basis of allegations made. In this view of the matter, without expressing any opinion about the fact that the applicant was the tenant or not I am of the view that the petitioner was not necessary or proper party and the trial Court was justified in rejecting the application. The revision petition is, therefore dismissed.
