480 of 1983.
The defendants challenged the decree before the Allahabad High Court under section 25 of the Small Causes Courts Act.
Kamla Ghauhan and held that Harpal Singh was the tenant.
It is number necessary to set out the details relating to the said proceeding except stating that Rent Control Officer as well as the appellate authority rejected the case of tenancy in favour of Smt.
The Judge, Small Causes Court, rejected the defence and decreed the suit.
From the Judgment and Order dated 23.11.1989 of the Allahabad High Court in Civil Revision No.
In 1978 Harpal Singh Chauhan was transferred outside Allahabad, and certain strangers initiated a proceeding under section 12 3A of the U.P. Urban Buildings Regulation of Letting, Rent and Eviction Act, 1972 hereinafter refered to as the Act with a prayer to declare the premises vacant.
2 Harpal Singh Chauhan, a Government servant, in 1968.
Kamla Chauhan and number he was the tenant.
The defence was once more the same plea which was taken in the proceeding under section 12 3A that Smt.
The High Court has, by impugned judgment, reversed the decree and dismissed the suit on the ground of number joinder of Sarojini Sinha.
The premises belonged to one G.D. Srivastava, who on his death was succeeded by his two daughters Smt.
In the meantime Shashi Srivastava instituted the present suit for eviction of Harpal Singh without Sarojini Sinha joining as a companyplaintiff, as according to the appellants case she was number available in Allahabad, on the ground of number payment of rent.
Kamla Chauhan was the tenant who had deposited the rent under section 30 of the Act.
It is said on behalf of the appellants that the proceeding, however, has number finally terminated in view of a remand order by the appellate authority on another issue.
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION Civil Appeal No.
6 Smt.
The house was let out to the respondent No.
1 Smt.
Sunil Gupta, Vikram Nath and H.K. Puri for the Appellants.
The Judgment of the Court was delivered by SHARMA, J. Special leave is granted.
Harpal Singh companytested the case on the ground that his wife, respondent No.
Although the action was opposed, the defendants did number take a plea of number maintainability of the suit on the ground of number joinder of Sarojini Sinha as a plaintiff.
243 of 1992.
Sarojini.
Shashi Srivastava, the sole original plaintiff since dead substituted, by her legal representatives and the appellant No.
The appeal arises out of a suit for eviction of the respondents from a building in the city of Allahabad.
Manoj Swarup and Ms. Lalita Kohli for the Respondents.
