Inam Ali vs Col. Sandeep Vasudeva and Others

S.K. Gupta, J—Having heard learned Senior Counsel on behalf of the revisionist as well as learned Counsel on behalf of the respondents/caveators, it transpires that the building, under the tenancy of Inam Ali, is owned by Colonel Sandeep Vasudeva. Since the Colonel was posted in the borders of country, being army personnel, so such building was under the care and supervision of respondent No. 2-Mr. M.R. Malhotra, who is the real father-in-law of Col. Sandeep Vasudeva.

Although, the building was let out by Mr. Malhotra, as a care taker of the same, to Mr. Inam Ali (revisionist), but the S.C.C. Suit was launched by Col. Sandeep Vasudeva against the revisionist after giving him the requisite notice.

Later on, an impleadment application was moved by Mr. M.R. Malhotra seeking his impleadment as co-plaintiff in SCC Suit No. 41 of 2013 and the same was allowed by the impugned order dated 22.1.2015 passed by learned Fifth Additional District Judge, Dehradun.

This order has been agitated by the tenant/revisionist Inam Ali in the instant revision.

Having considered the rival submissions of learned Counsel for the parties and on looking to the order, under challenge, I feel that filing of this revision is just a device so as to prolong the litigation launched by Landlord Col. Sandeep Vasudeva.

There is no infirmity or illegality in the order impugned. Rather, the technical defence, which could have been raised by the revisionist Inam Ali, has been removed by the Court below by way of permitting impleadment of Mr. M.R. Malhotra. All told, there is no force in this revision which is liable to be dismissed at the threshold. The revision is dismissed accordingly.