OM PARKASH KAPOOR Vs. NIRMALA DEVI AND OTHERS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE impugned order of the rent controller declining to stay ejectment proceedings against the petitioner, after the filing of an inter -pleader suit by the petitioner to which the respondents too were party, is clearly erroneous and cannot, therefore, be sustained.

(2.) TO give a brief resume of facts relevant to the controversy here the petitioner Om Parkash was a tenant of a shop under the Joint Hindu Family firm Messrs Janki Dass and Sons. Amar Nath as the Karta of the Joint Hindu Family was the person to whom rent was paid by the petitioner. On the death of Amar Nath, the tenant -Om Parkash started paying rent to his widow -Lajwanti.

(3.) IN the meanwhile, on February 8, 1980, Lajwanti, the widow of Amar Nath sold the shop to respondents -Nirmla Devi and others, who on June 10, 1985, during the pendency of the revision petition filed by the petitioner in this Court filed an application for ejectment against the petitioner before the rent controller seeking his ejectment on the ground of personal necessity and non payment of arrears of rent. These proceedings were sought to be stayed by the petitioner by an application under Section 20 of the Code of Civil Procedure, which he filed before the rent controller on August 19, 1985. This application was, however, dismissed on October 5, 1985.