Bapna, J. - (1.) THIS is a revision against an order of the learned Munsif, Jaipur East, rejecting the objections of the petitioners in execution proceedings.
(2.) THE non-petitioner Vaid Ramchandra obtained a decree for ejectment against his tenant Raghunath on the 3rd of October, 1949. In execution of the decree the petitioners Amir Chand and Kishan Chand objected on the allegations that they had obtained a sub-lease from Raghunath, and were not liable to ejectment as they had not been made parties to the suit, in which the decree had been obtained. THE learned Munsif relying on Sailendra Nath Bhattacharjee vs. Bijanlal Chakravarty (l) held that the determination of the lease amounted to a determination of the sub-lease as well, and the objectors had no right to resist delivery of possession. In this revision reliance is placed on P. E. D. J. Ezra vs. J. E. Gubbay (2) for the proposition that the decree-holder should be driven to a separate suit against the petitioners. That view was overruled by two Divi-' sion Benches of the Calcutta High Court in Sheikh Yusuf vs. Jyotish Chandra Banerjee (3) and Sailendra Nath Bhattacharjee vs. Bijan Lal Chakravarty (l ). The last two cases were approved by their Lordships of the Supreme Court in Shri Jagadguru Gurushiddaswami Guru Gangadharswami Murusavirnath vs. The Dakshina Maharashtra Digambar Jain Sabha (4 ). The view taken by the learned Munsif is correct, and this revision has no force and is dismissed with costs. .;