Sibghat Ullah Khan, J. - (1.) Heard Sri Shiva Kant Tiwari, learned counsel for the tenants petitioners and Sri Subhash Vidyarthi, learned counsel for landlord respondent No.2.
(2.) Landlord respondent No.2 purchased House No.279/69, Pan Dariba, Lucknow through registered sale deed dated 26.06.1984. Two different portions of the said house each consisting of a room and a verandah were occupied by each petitioner as tenant. Rate of rent was Rs. 8/- per month. Tenants petitioners (or their ancestors) are continuing as tenants since 1930. Lower court records have been summoned. Copy of the sale deed was filed before the court below. Through the said sale deed, respondent No.2 purchased half share of Babu Lal Chaurasiya. Even though learned counsel for tenants petitioners has argued that Babu Lal Chaurasiya had only one fourth share, however that is a dispute between other co-sharers of Babu Lal and respondent No.2. Petitioners have got no concern therewith. In the sale deed, it was mentioned that there were four tenants in different portions of the house in dispute including the petitioner of each writ petition.
(3.) Landlord respondent No.2 filed suits for eviction on the ground of default against each petitioner. According to the plaint allegations in each case, default was from 26.06.1984 to 31.03.1989. Against the petitioner of first writ petition, the suit was registered as S.C.C. Suit No.197 of 1989 and against the petitioner of the second writ petition as S.C.C. Suit No.199 of 1989. Both the suits were dismissed by J.S.C.C., Lucknow through judgment and decree dated 21.07.1995. Landlord respondent No.2 filed two revisions against the said decrees being S.C.C. Revision No.80 of 1995 and S.C.C. Revision No.79 of 1995. X A.D.J., Lucknow through judgment and order dated 03.09.1998 allowed both the revisions and directed the tenants petitioners to deliver possession within one month, hence these writ petitions.;