Document Fragment View

Matching Fragments

19. The respondent has not denied that petitioner is her landlady. The rent receipt is on record. Therefore, in view of the aforesaid authorities, by virtue of WILL dated 24.02.1989 and the copy of house tax receipt, the aspect of ownership goes in favour of the petitioner as the petitioner has shown that she has better title than the respondent. The contention of the respondent that other owners were not impleaded is not having any force as it is settled law that any of the co­owner can file the petition U/S 14 (1) (e) of DRC Act (Reliance placed upon India Umbrella Manufacturing Company Vs. Bhagabandei Aggarwal (2004) 3 SCC 178, in which it was observed that "It is well settled that one of the co­owners can file a suit for eviction of a tenant".). Similarly, the contention of the respondent that other legal heirs of Late Kacheri Mal (father of the respondent) have not been impleaded as respondents is not having any force as it is settled law that on death of a tenant, the tenancy devolves upon the legal heirs as joint tenancy. LRs are joint tenants and not tenant in common (Reliance placed upon AIR 1963 Supreme Court 468, titled as "Kanji Manji Vs. Trustees of the Port of Bombay).