Sudhir Chandra Verma, J. - (1.) THE petitioners have claimed ownership right and the right of Landlord on the basis of sale deed dated 20 -8 -1987. The petitioners have also claimed to be in possession over part of the premises in dispute. In a suit for arrears of rent and ejectment filed by one Smt. paigham -bari Begum, the petitioner has sought impleadment as necessary party. Both the Courts have held that in a suit for arrears of rent and ejectment, which is basically a suit between the Landlord and tenant, the plaintiff's impleadment is not necessary and in case he is entitled either as owner or as Landlord he may initiate separate proceedings for establishing his title and for retention of his possession, in case he is in possession. I find no reason to interfere with the orders of Judge Small Causes Courts dated 13 -1 -1990 and the order dated 26 -8 -1991 by the learned Additional District Judge, Moradabad in rejecting the petitioner's application for impleadment under Order 1, Rule 10 of the Code of Civil Procedure. The petition has no merit and is accordingly in limine.;