(1.) THIS is a defendant's writ petition arising out of a suit for ejectment and recovery of mesne profits.
(2.) BRIEF facts giving rise to the present writ petition are that the plaintiffs-opposite parties nos. 1 and 2 had filed suit against the defendant-petitioner and Shri Virendra Bahadur Singh on the allegations that Shri Virendra Bahadur Singh was a tenant of the room in question in premises no. 67/13, Daulatganj, Kanpur, at the rate of Rs. 110/- per month. He was in arrears of rent from 13-10-1971 to 11-2-1973, hence a notice of demand and ejectment was served upon him and despite service of notice he did not pay rent, hence the suit. In paragraph 7 of the plaint (Annexure II attached with the writ petition) it has been averred that the defendant petitioner was asserting that he was tenant of the accommodation in dispute and that he had deposited rent under Section 30 of U. P. Act No. 13 of 1972 but according to the plaintiffs-opposite parties he was not tenant of the accommodation in dispute and his possession was over the accommodation in dispute either with leave or licence of the defendant no. 1 (Virendra Bahadur Singh) or the defendant petitioner was sub-tenant. Since the opposite party no. 4 in the present writ petition was recognizing the claim of the defendant petitioner, hence he was impleaded as defendant no. 3 in the suit.
(3.) BEFORE me the plaintiffs-opposite parties have been represented through Shri Raja Ram Agarwal, a senior advocate of this Court. Counter affidavit and rejoinder affidavit have been exchanged between the parties.