Falshaw, J. - (1.) THIS is a revision petition filed by a Defendant Balmukand Guroo challenging an order of the lower Court holding a suit instituted by Bawa Raghunath Das Ji Respondent to be maintainable.
(2.) THE relevant facts are that in March 1959 the Petitioner filed an application under Section 14 of the Delhi Rent Control Act of 1958 for the ejectment of Gopal Narain from the premises in suit on the ground of non -payment of rent. Gopal Narain denied that he was the tenant of the Petitioner, claiming that his landlord was Bawa Raghunath Das Ji. The latter was subsequently joined as a party and the only contest which followed was between Balmukand Guroo and Bawa Raghunath Dass Ji as to which of them was entitled to receive the amount deposited in the Court by the tenant. It appears that there is serious dispute between these two regarding the ownership of the house which Bawa Raghunath Ji claims on the basis of a gift in his favour by the mother of Balmukand Guroo made as long ago as 1940, while the position of Balmukand Guroo is that the house belonged to his father and that his mother had no power to make the gift. The contest regarding which of them was entitled to the rent lying in Court was decided by the Rent Controller in favour of Balmukand Guroo and the appeal of Bawa Raghunath Das Ji was dismissed by the Rent Control Tribunal which, however, held that the enquiry before a Rent Controller is only of a summary nature and referred to the provisions of Section 50(4) of the Act.
(3.) THIS decision was given on the 26th of May 1960 and within a few days Bawa Raghunath Das Ji instituted his suit claiming a declaration that Gopal Narain is the tenant of the Plaintiff and not of Balmukand Guroo, and that the Plaintiff was entitled to the amount deposited in the Court of the Rent Controller. The Defendant immediately raised the plea that the suit was not maintainable and it is the decision in the Plaintiffs favour on this point which is challenged in the present revision petition.;