Satyeshwar Roy, J.

Heard the learned counsel for the parties. As the points involved in all these cases are identical, the matter is being disposed of by this common order.

2. It was submitted on behalf' of the petitioners that as an issue on the question of title has been framed by the court below, the opposite parties, plaintiffs in the court below, must pay advalorem court fee. There appears to be confusion on the question whether in a suit filed by landlord for eviction of tenant from a building, if the question of title is required to be gone into on being raised and pressed by the tenant, the landlord shall have to pay advalorem court fee even if he neither raised the question of title nor prayed for a decree on the basis of title.

3. The opposite parties filed three separate suits for eviction of three tenants-petitioners from three tenanted buildings on the allegation that the petitioners were tenants of the opposite party. The former in the written statements, inter-alia, stated that they have purchased the property and were in possession of the same as owners. The question of title was raised in the written statement.

4. The trial court did not frame any issue on titl