Sangeeta Chandra, J. - (1.) This petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India has been filed by the petitioners praying for a direction to set aside the order dated 09.02.2018 passed by the learned Additional District Judge, Court No. 17, Agra in S.C.C. Revision No. 44 of 2013 (Om Prakash Jindal and others vs Smt. Chhawan Devi and others) and the judgment and decree dated 16.04.2013 passed by the Judge, Small Causes Court, Agra in S.C.C. Case No. 24 of 2010 (Smt. Chhawan Devi and others vs Om Prakash Jindal and others).
(2.) Learned counsel for the petitioners has submitted that petitioner No. 1 as well as his brother Radha Kishan Jindal, were both sitting tenants of the property in question before it was bought by the respondents through registered Sale Deed on 12.12.1992. The plaintiffs while issuing notice as landlords to the petitioners on 20.02.2010 had mentioned therein that petitioner No. 1, Om Prakash Jindal has neither paid rent of the property in question since December, 1992 to the respondents nor has vacated the property instead he has sublet the same to Susheel Kumar Jindal, petitioner No. 2 and Anil Kumar Jindal, petitioner No. 3, sons of late Radha Kishan Jindal and the notice was replied to by the defendants through their Advocate contesting the allegation of subletting and saying that they had inherited the tenancy from their father late Radha Kishan Jindal, who died in 1992 and they have been paying the rent to the plaintiffs since December, 1992 upto date. The S.C.C. Case No. 24 of 2010 was filed thereafter by the respondents praying for eviction of the petitioners on grounds of non-payment of rent and on subletting the property in dispute by defendant No. 1, i.e. petitioner No. 1, Om Prakash Jindal to defendant Nos. 2 and 3, both sons of late Radha Kishan Jindal. The pleadings were exchanged and the arguments were heard by the learned Trial Court and the suit was decreed by the learned Trial Court giving a finding that defendant No. 1 alone was the tenant and defendant Nos. 2 and 3, both sons of late Radha Kishan Jindal, had been inducted into the property illegally by defendant No. 1. The receipts that were filed by defendant Nos. 2 and 3 to show that they were in fact the sons of erstwhile tenant late Radha Kishan Jindal, were disbelieved by the learned court below on misconceived ground and a direction was issued for the petitioners to give arrears of rent to the respondents-plaintiffs along with interest due thereon within a period of 60 days and to handover vacant possession of the disputed property and also to pay damages at the rate of Rs. 5000/- per month from the date of institution of suit till the date of giving of vacant possession.
(3.) Aggrieved against the order dated 16.04.2013, the petitioners filed S.C.C. Revision No. 44 of 2013, which was initially dismissed by the learned Additional District & Sessions Judge, Court No. 17, Agra on 24.09.2016.;