NEMICHAND JAIN Vs. RAM 8ABOO C.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) IN this petition, dismissal of the application filed by the present petitioner for being arrayed as defendant, is being challenged. The brief facts of the case out of which this revision petition arises are as under:

(2.) RAMBABU is the landlord. He riled a suit against Padamchand or eviction. In plaint para 7, it has been suited that Padamchand had vacated the shop in question and that he has inducted one Nemichand. This Nemichand is non other but the present petitioner. In the plaint, it has not been stated as to in what capacity this Nemichand is in possession.

(3.) IT is settled law that a person who is in possession as a sub -tenant is a proper party. For this reliance has been placed on Satya Prakash and another v. Gulab Chand and others (1981 MPRCJ - SN 126) and Seth Gordhandas v. Bhagwanji (1983 MPRCJ SN 3). He has also placed reliance on the decision given in Amrik Rai v. State of M.P. (1977 MPLJ SN 16).