(MUNSHI) SHIB RAM Vs. FAQIRA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This is a case involving a very important point of principle and should be decided by a Bench of two Judges at least.

(2.) One of the plaintiffs is the appellant in this Court. The plaintiffs brought the suit, out of which this appeal has arisen, on the allegation that they were the owners of a certain house and its appurtenant buildings, that they let out a portion of that house and building to the respondent, the defendant in the case, on a rent of Rs. 5 per mensem, that the defendant paid only a part of the rent due, that a notice to quit was served on the defendant and that he had failed to vacate the portion occupied by him. The plaintiffs accordingly sued to recover the arrears of rent and a small amount as damages for mesne profits. The plaintiffs brought their suit on a Court-fee, calculated on Rs. 60, viz., a year's rent, under the provisions of Sub-clause (cc), Clause 11 of Section 7 of the Court Fees Act. They valued their suit at Rs. 60 so far as the claim for possession went.

(3.) The defence was that the defendant did not hold the property under the plaintiffs; but he held it from one Mt. Durgi, He stated in his written statement that Mt. Durgi was a necessary party to the suit.