FURKAN AHMAD Vs. SAYED AHMED RAZA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard Sri Pradeep Kumar, learned counsel appearing for the applicant and Sri Sharad Sharma, holding brief of Sri H.N. Sharma, learned counsel representing the plaintiff-opposite party No.1.

(2.) This revision, under Section 115 of the Civil P.C., 1908, hereinafter called the Code, read with Section 25 of the Provincial Small Cause Courts Act, 1887, as amended by the State of U.P. is directed against the order D/- 1st Jan., 1991 passed by the District and Sessions Judge, Etawah, exercising power of the Judge Small Causes in Small Cause Case No.7 of 1989 between Saiyed Raza and Ansar Ahmad and others, whereby the prayer of the applicant for being impleaded as defendant in the suit has been rejected.

(3.) The plaintiff-opposite party No.1 has instituted a suit against the defendant-opposite parties Nos.2 and 3 their ejectment from the disputed house. The suit is founded on the alleged contract of tenancy. The applicant moved an application for being impleaded as defendant claiming that he was a necessary party inasmuch as he was in occupation of the disputed house in the capacity of a tenant in pursuance of certain alleged agreement of tenancy between him and the plaintiff-opposite party No.1, and the decree in the suit was likely to affect him.