IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA C.R. No.530 of 2007 ---- Prem Kumari Tibarelal, wife of Vijay Kumar Agrawal, resident of Mohalla- Nai Sarak Chowk P.S.Chowk, District-Patna. -Defendant-Petitioner. Versus 1. Sarika Ranjan wife of Sri Shyam Sunder, 2. Smt. Renu Koshri wife of Sri Shankar Prasad Both are resident of mohalla- Dalhatta, Patnacity, P.S.Malsalami, District-Patna. -- Plaintiffs-Opposite Parties 1st Set. 3. Sri Vijay Kumar Agrawal, proprietor of M/s Sheela Company, Usha Sewing Machine, situated at Mohalla-Chowk, P.S.Chowk, District-Patna. -- Defendant-Opposite Party. ----- For the petitioner : Mr.Shivajee Pandey, Senior Advocate M/s B.N.Tiwary & Nalin Vilochan Tiwary, Advocates. For the opposite parties : None. ---- 02. 04.09.2009 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner. 2. This civil revision has been filed by defendant- petitioner challenging order dated 20.01.2007 by which the learned Munsif, Patna City added her as a defendant in Title Eviction Suit No.20 of 2006 on the application filed by the plaintiff under Order I Rule 10(2) read with Section 151 of the Code of Civil Procedure. 3. The aforesaid suit was filed by the plaintiffs-opposite parties no.1 and 2 for eviction of opposite party no.3 from the suit premises. The specific claim of the plaintiff was that he had purchased the suit property from Surendra Singh vide a registered deed and the defendant was his tenant. 4. However, defendant-opposite party no.3 appeared in the suit and filed an affidavit for leave to contest stating that - 2 - defendant was not the tenant, rather Smt. Prem Kumari Tibarebal was the tenant in the suit premises under Surendra Singh and was paying rent to him and that the said Surendra Singh had never informed Smt. Prem Kumar Tibarebal that he had sold the suit premises. 5. It is quite apparent that the original sole defendant is the husband of Smt. Prem Kumar Tibarebal who has been subsequently added as a co-defendant and the plaintiffs-opposite parties no.1 and 2 specifically claimed that he had no knowledge about any lease deed executed earlier by Surendra Singh in the name of Smt. Prem Kumari Tibarebal and hence he filed Eviction Suit against the sole defendant Sri Vijay Kumar Agrawal who was seen dealing with business in the suit premises and only from the leave petition filed by the original defendant, the plaintiffs came to know about the said lease deed. 6. Considering the aforesaid circumstances, the learned court below found it proper to add the said Smt. Prem Kumari Tibarebal, who is the wife of the original sole defendant, as defendant no.2 for full, final and proper adjudication of the said suit and to avoid any future complication. 7. This court does not find any illegality in the impugned order of the learned court below, nor does it find any jurisdictional error therein. Accordingly, this civil revision is dismissed. Sunil (S. N. Hussain, J.)