AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
Santosh Duggal, J.—This revision petition is directed against the dismissal of an application filed by the defendant in the suit under Order 1, Rule 10 CPC for impleading Mst. Laceq Sultan as a party to the silicon the allegation that she is the owner of the property for which the rent is claimed by the respondent herein, namely, Smt. Farhat Jamat, as plaintiff in the suit.
On hearing the matter it is noted that the suit of the plaintiff is for recovery of rent on the allegation that she had purchased this property, where the petitioner was admittedly a tenant, from legal heirs of one Ataur-Rehman, who had allegedly purchased this property from said Smt. Laeeq Sultan.
The suit is before the Judge, Small Causes Court where no question of title can be gone into. Otherwise also, the nature of the suit is such that the question of title may be incidentally involved only in the limited sense that the plaintiff, shall have to establish her right to claim rent from the defendant in the suit. Petitioner''s attempt, as defendant, to bring in the original owner, to dispute liability to pay rent to the plaintiff is obviously an attempt to complicate the issues and bring in questions of title, which is not within the competence of the Small Causes Court.
In this suit, which is simply for recovery of rent, it is for the plaintiff to prove, as already observed, her right to claim rent, and it is for the defendant to prove that the rent, as alleged in this case, is not payable to her but to some other person, and further to show that he has so paid the rent to the person . who was rightly entitled to recover.
There was no justification for the defendant to seek an order of the Court that Smt. Laeeq Sultan be made a party to the suit. The application of the defendant under Order 1 Rule 10 CPC was rightly dismissed by the Court below.
The revision petition has no merits. Dismissed. Interim order is vacated.
No order as to costs.