JANKI PRASSAD YADAV Vs. ABDULAZIZ & ORS.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The only question that is involved in the present revision petition is whether an unnotified sub-tenant is a necessary party to a suit for ejectment on the ground of sub-letting.

(2.) Petitioner claims to have been inducted into the suit premises by the predecessor-in-interest of the defendant-tenants of the suit long ago. The plaintiff-respondent is a subsequent purchaser from the erstwhile landlord of the said predecessor-in- interest of the defendant-tenants. The petitioner wanted to be impleaded as a party to the suit and the learned court below by order dated 2.3.1998 rejected his prayer on a finding that he is not a necessary party to the suit. According to sub-section (2) of Sec. 13 of the West Bengal Premises. Tenancy Act, it is only those sub-tenants referred to under Sec. 16 of the Act who have given notice of their sub-tenancies to their landlords under the previsions of that Sec. are required to be made parties in any suit or proceeding for recovery of possession of the premises by the landlord and sub-section (3) of the said Sec. 13 makes it clear that save as provided in sub-section (2) and sub-section (4), a decree or order for the delivery of possession of any premises shall be binding on every sub- tenant.

(3.) Sub-section (4) has no manner of application to the facts and circumstances of the instant case.