P L D 1960 (W (PLP)

Waheed Farooqi for Respondents. Date of hearing : 25th January, 1960. A suit for ejectment, arrears of rent and mesne profits was instituted by Messrs Adamji Abdulali & Sons against Ghulam Sarwar and Messrs Mohsin and Tahir, on the allegation that the premises in suit were let out on rent by the plaintiff's to Ghulam Sarwar, and the latter, against the terms of the lease transferred their tenancy rights in favour of Messrs Mohsin and Tahir. Fida Hussain, defendant No. 3, was impleaded as defendant because he considered himself to be a claimant to the property in dispute. A certificate for ejectment was obtained from the Rent Controller.

2. One Nooruddin applied to the Court for being made a party, to this suit on the allegation that he was a co‑partner with the plaintiffs in the property in dispute. His application was rejected by the trial Judge by his order dated 9‑3‑1959. There are now two revision applications against the order of the trial Judge, before this Court, one instituted by Ghulam Sarwar and Mohsin and Tahir (C. Revn. 84/59), and the other by Noorud din (C. Revn. 85/59), with the prayer that Nooruddin be impleaded as party in the case.

3. The suit is one for ejectment of the defendant by the Landlord after obtaining a certificate from the Rent Controller. Messrs Adamji & Sons claiming themselves to be the landlords of the premises, brought the suit against their tenant Ghulam Sarwar and his assignees Messrs Mohsin, and Tahir on the ground that Ghulam Sarwar was their tenant, and Mohsin and Tahir were the assignees of their tenant. In a suit of this nature the dispute is one between the landlord and the tenant, and any person claiming to be a joint owner with the landlord, who has not himself admitted the tenant into the tenancy, cannot be made a party, unless it is established that he was in fact at the time of letting the tenant in, a co‑owner with the landlord. In this case Messrs Adamji Abdulali & Sons are undoubtedly the landlords. Ghulam Sarwar was let into the tenancy by them. If on the evidence adduced it is found that Nooruddin was included at the time of the creation of the tenancy, in "Messrs Adamji Abdulali & Sons" as a co‑owner, he will no doubt be a landlord, and will be a necessary party, because all the co‑owners as landlords are required by law to institute a suit for the ejectment of the tenant. There is no evidence that Nooruddin was included as a co‑owner in "Messrs Adamji Abdulali & Sons". at the time of the creation of the tenancy. At the stage at which the suit was, the order made by the learned trial Judge was perfectly correct. 1f at a later stage it transpires that that Nooruddin was included as landlord in "Messrs Adamji Abdulali & Sons" he will no doubt be included as a party.

4. But if he was not included in "Messrs Adamji Abdul ali & Sons" as a co‑owner, and claims a title to this property on some other ground, he cannot be joined as a party in this suit which is one for ejectment of a tenant by a landlord. For these reasons both the revision applications against the order of the trial Judge are dismissed with costs. K. M. A. Applications dismissed.