Augustine George Masih, J. - (1.) (Oral)- Challenge in this revision petition is to the order dated 30.09.2015 passed by the Rent Controller, Ludhiana, whereby an application moved under Order I Rule 10 read with Section 151 CPC for impleading Devinder Singh (respondent No.2 herein) as a co-petitioner i.e. petitioner No.2, has been allowed.
(2.) It is the contention of learned counsel for the petitioner that the learned Rent Controller has not appreciated that question of title cannot be decided in a rent petition. What is being claimed by respondent No.2 primarily is a right to be impleaded as a party being a co-sharer of the property. He contends that the title cannot be decided by the Rent Controller and, therefore, by virtue of the present application being allowed, the eviction suit would be converted into a title suit which is not permissible in law. In support thereof, he places reliance upon the judgments of this Court in Paramjit Singh v. Gurcharan Singh Saini and others 2015 (1) R.C.R. (Rent) 50 , Jagjit Singh v. Ajit Lal and Anr. 2014 (1) R.C.R. (Rent) 443 and Kiran Kumar Bansal v. Kusum Bansal, 2001 (2) R.C.R. (Rent) 263.
(3.) I have considered the submissions made by learned counsel for the petitioner and have also gone through the impugned order dated 30.09.2015 passed by the Rent Controller.;