A.N.Varma, J. - (1.) This is a tenants' writ petition. It is directed against the concurrent decrees passed by the courts below, decreeing a suit filed by three persons, namely, Brij Basi Lal, Bishambhar Nath and one Smt. Champa Devi, the mother of the first two for ejectment and recovery of arrears of rent and damages. Both the courts below have decreed the suit.
(2.) Briefly stated the plaint case was that the plaintiffs were the owners of the house in dispute situate at Arya Samaj Road, Mathura. One Gopal was the tenant of the plaintiffs in the aforesaid shop and on his death defendant No. 1, Mool Chand illegally occupied the dispute and started claiming that his son Jagdish Prasad, defendant No. 2 had inherited the tenancy rights by virtue of his being a legal heir of the deceased Gopal. The plaintiff filed a suit No. 497 of 1946 against the defendant No. 1 for ejectment. The defendant No. 2 was also impleaded in that suit. The suit was decreed against both. It was urged that the defendants Nos. 1 and 2 were in occupation of the shop as tresspassers and not as tenants. In order to save themselves from ejectment the said defendants entered into an agreement of tenancy with the plaintiff Brij Basi Lal on a monthly rental of Rs. 30/-. This was done under a rent note dated 26-2-1959 executed by the defendant Jagdish Prasad in favour of Brij Basi Lal. The defendants paid rent upto 25th of September, 1960 but thereafter they failed to pay any rent. A notice of demand dated 3 5-1965 was consequently served on the defendants. By the same notice the tenancy of the defendants was also terminated. 2A. The suit was contested by Jagdish Prasad alone, who is arrayed here as petitioner No. 2. His defence was that he was not bound by the terms of agreement executed by his father Mool Chand. It was further contended by him that Smt. Champa Devi, one of the plaintiffs having died during the pendency of the suit and her daughter not having beenimpl eaded, the suit had abated as a whole.
(3.) It appears that the statements of counsel for the parties were recorded under Order 10 Rule 2 Code of Civil Procedure by the Court. In the statement under Order 10 Shri Rakhal Das, counsel for the plaintiffs stated that the shop in dispute was given to the defendant by Brij Basi Lal, the Karta of the Khanda on behalf of the three plaintiffs. However, in pursuance of an award which was made a rule of the court Smt. Champa Devi was granted only a life estate in the property in dispute. Consequently upon her death the other two plaintiffs alone became the sole owners and landlord.;