IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA C.R. No.925 of 2009 Md. Shahabuddin S/o Mustaque Ahmad resident at Siwan Kasba Siwan Mohalla Kaghzi P.O. & P.S. Siwan City Dist. Siwan Defendant no.1- Petitioner Versus 1. Ainullah Khan S/o Md Yunus Khan resident at Siwan Kasba Siwan Mohalla Naya Bazar Hospital Road Dist. Siwan Plaintiff no.1- Opposite party 2. Imteyaz Ahmad son of Mustaque Ahmad 3. Bibi Quraisha @ Mazda Khatoon W/o Mustaque Ahmad Both resident of Siwan Kasba Siwan Mohalla Kaghzi P.O. & P.S. Siwan City Dist. Siwan Defendants no.2 and 3- opposite party 4. Sahida Umar wife of Merazuddin Ahmad resident at Siwan Kasba Siwan Mohalla Kaghzi P.O. & P.S. Siwan City Dist. Siwan Plaintiff no.3- opposite party ----------- For the petitioner: Mr M.S. Hoda, Advocate For the Opposite party: None --------- 02 23.07.2009 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner. 2. This civil revision has been filed by defendant no.1- petitioner challenging order dated 04.05.2009 by which learned Munsif I, Siwan has rejected petition for dismissing Eviction Suit no. 31 of 1990 on the ground of abatement 3. The aforesaid Eviction Suit was filed by two brothers/co- sharers namely, Ainullah Khan and Zafrullah Khan, out of whom Aniullah Khan (Plaintiff no.1) is alive and is opposite party no.1 in the instant civil revision, whereas Zafrullah Khan (Plaintiff no.2) died during the pendency of the suit on 11.11.2004 but his heirs were not substituted by the remaining plaintiffs. Hence according to defendant no.1-petitioner the entire eviction suit has abated. 4. The learned court below has considered the matter in detail whreafter it has come to the conclusion that Zafrullah Khan - 2 - (Plaintiff no.2) has sold his property to one Sahida Umar (opposite party no.4) who had already been impleaded as plaintiff no.3 in the suit. It maybe noted that defendant no.1 never challenged the said impleadment of plaintiff no.3. 5. In any view of the matter, if two co-sharers have filed a suit for eviction and one of them dies, the other co-sharer can legally maintain the suit for eviction on the ground of his personal necessity which has to be considered and decided by the court after hearing the parties and after considering their respective pleadings and evidence. Hence there is no question of any abatement of the suit due to the death of Zafrullah Khan (Plaintiff no.2). 6. In the aforesaid facts and circumstances, this Court does not find any illegality in the impugned order of the learned court below nor finds any jurisdictional error therein. Accordingly, this civil revision is dismissed. shahid (S.N.Hussain, J)