HIRAN BALA DEBI Vs. PRODYUT KUMAR MONDAL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This revision is directed against an Order no. 10 dated 15.6.88 made by the 5th Court of the Munsif at Alipore in Title Suit No. 64 of 1987.

(2.) The plaintiff-petitioners filed a suit for eviction against defendant-opposite party no.1 alleging that the opposite party no. 1 was a tenant under the plaintiffs in respect of the suit premises at a monthly rental of Rs. 115/-. Eviction has been sought for on the ground of default in the payment of rent since May, 1986 and reasonable requirement of the landlords for their own use and occupation. The tenancy is alleged to have been terminated by service of a notice to quit dated 12.9.86.

(3.) There is no controversy that the tenant-defendant no. 1 did not enter appearance and contest the suit. Tenant's wife Nanda Mandal figuring as opposite party no. 2 in this revision filed an application under Order 1 Rule 10 C.P. Code for being impleaded as a party defendant in the suit. In her petition she claims to be the ostensible tenant and a benamder of the husband. The allegation is that her husband took settlement in 1976 at a monthly rental of Rs. 115 /-. Since the inception of tenancy the wife is living in the suit premises with her three children. Her husband has been transferred to Bilaspur in the State of Madhya Pradesh. The wife paid rent till April 1986 to the previous landlord. On receipt of a letter from Maniklal Chatterjee she has been paying rent to the plaintiffs who granted receipts. Since 1977 the husband is reluctant to keep contact with the family and so she intends to be added as a party.