IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA SA No.26 of 2006 SUNAINA DEVI & ANR 1. Sunaina Devi, wife of Sri Shankar Dayal Prasad 2. Anil Kumar, son of Sri Shankar Dayal Prasad Both residents of muhalla Gaushala Road, Siwan,P.O. & P.S. Siwan, District Siwan. .Plaintiffs-appellants-appellants. Versus Rajeshwari Singh, son of late Sukhdeo Singh, resident of village Karsaut, P.O. Karsaut, P.S. Daraunda, District Siwan, at present at Fattehpur near Durga Mandir, P.O. and P.S. Siwan,Distt. Siwan. … Defendant-respondent-respondent ----------- For the appellants : M/s Dronacharya and Ajay Kumar Pandey, Advocates. For the respondent : None. ---------- 08/ 06.05.2009 Heard learned counsel for the appellants. 2. This second appeal has been filed by the plaintiffs- appellants-appellants challenging the judgments and decree of both the learned courts below. 3. The matter arises out of Eviction Suit No. 17 of 1996, which was filed by the plaintiffs for eviction of the sole defendant-respondent-respondent on the ground of default in payment of rent and for other ancillary reliefs. 4. The aforesaid eviction suit was dismissed on 21.05.1999 by the learned Munsif-I, Siwan, without contest as the defendant did not appear. The said suit was dismissed on the ground that the plaintiffs had failed to prove their title and ownership over the premises involved in the suit. Against the aforesaid judgment and decree of the learned trial court, the plaintiffs filed Eviction Appeal No. 07 of 1999, which was allowed by the learned Additional District Judge-cum-Fast Track Court No.III, Siwan vide 2 his judgment and decree dated 10.08.2005 holding that the plaintiffs had proved themselves to be owners of the two khatas, involved in the suit and the relationship of landlod and tenant between the parties as well as the default in payment of rent by the defendant. But no order was passed with respect to the rent pendent lite. 5. The instant appeal has been filed by the plaintiffs- appellants only for payment of rent pendente lite, but from the arguments as well as from the materials on record, it is quite apparent that the learned court of appeal below after considering the pleadings and evidence on record came to the specific conclusion that the plaintiffs have proved their prima facie ownership over the suit premises and have also proved the relationship of landlord and tenant between the parties as well as default in payment of rent and on its basis had finally held that the appellants are further entitled to realize Rs.12,000.00 as arrears of rent from the respondent. 6. in the aforesaid facts and circumstances, this Court does not find any illegality in the impugned judgments and decree of the learned courts below nor does it find any substantial question of law involved in the suit, which is, accordingly, dismissed at this stage of hearing under Order XLI Rule 11 of the Code of Civil Procedure. MPS/ ( S. N. Hussain, J. )