The plaintiffs in a pending suit for eviction of opposite party no. 1 from a building are challenging, by this application, the order passed by the trial court adding opposite party nos. 2 to 5 as the defendants in the suit.

2. The plaintiffs-petitioners' case is that the building was let out by them to opposite party no.1 who became their tenant. An order was passed under section 11A of the Bihar Buildings (Lease, Rent and Eviction) Control Act, 1947 (hereinafter to be referred to as the Act). For non-compliance with the direction of the court, the defence of the sole defendant (opposite party no.1) was struck off Opposite parties 2 to 4, who are sons of the original defendant, and opposite party no.5, who is his daughter, filed an application under Order I Rule 10 of the Code of Civil Procedure (hereinafter to be called the Code) for being added as party defendants on the ground that they are the tenants of the premises under the plaintiffs and that their father is in their (plaintiffs') collusion. The application was allowed in spite of objections by the plaintiffs.

3. It is manifest that the conditions in cither sub-rule (l) or (2) of Rule 10 of Order I are not satisfied