IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATES OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Civil Revision No.6146 of 2009 Date of decision: September 13, 2010. Krishan Lal Bareja ...Petitioner(s) v. Ram Bhaj & Anr. ...Respondent(s) CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE KANWALJIT SINGH AHLUWALIA Present: Shri R.S. Malik, Advocate, for the petitioner(s). Shri B.S. Bairagi, Advocate, for respondent No.1. Shri Surinder Singh Virk, Advocate, for respondent No.2. Kanwaljit Singh Ahluwalia , J. (Oral): Grievance of the petitioner-landlord is that his brother, who was disowned by his father, has filed an application under Order 1 Rule 10 CPC to be impleaded as a party in the eviction petition instituted by the petitioner, against respondent No.1 – tenant. There seems to be an inter-se dispute between the petitioner and respondent No.2, who are siblings, as to who has inherited the shop in question from their father. The relationship of landlord-tenant is necessary to be proved by the person who has filed the eviction petition. Impleadment of respondent No.1 in the eviction petition is not a right answer on the facts and circumstances of the case, as petitioner remained master of the plaint instituted by him. Respondent No.2 – Narain Dass may also claim that he is landlord by filing a separate petition. In case, such a course is adopted by respondent No.2 within two weeks from today, the District Judge, Karnal shall entrust the eviction petition filed by the petitioner, and the eviction petition to be instituted by respondent No.2 – Narain Dass, to one Court who shall try both simultaneously, but separately. Petition disposed of. Copy of the order dasti on payment of usual charges. [Kanwaljit Singh Ahluwalia] September 13, 2010. Judge kadyan