1. This revision has been directed against the order dated 30.10.1991, passed by Additional Civil Judge No.3, Jaipur City, Jaipur, by which he allowed the application of the Non-Petitioner Nos. 1 to 3 and impleaded them as defendants in the suit.

2. The brief relevant facts of the case are that the plaintiff-petitioner filed a suit for eviction against the Non-Petitioner Nos. 4 and 5. In that suit, the Non Petitioner Nos. 1 to 3 filed an application under Order 1 Rule 10 for becoming parties on the ground that the disputed property was leased out by their father Keshar Lal and as such they were necessary parties in the suit. The trial Court allowed the application and impleaded the Non-Petitioner Nos. 1 to 3 as defendants in the suit, vide its order dated 30.10.1991. This order has been challenged by the plaintiff petitioner.

3. Counsel for the petitioner argued that the dispute which the non-petitioners want to raise in the present suit is regarding title which is foreign to the present suit and as such the non-petitioner Nos. 1 to 3 cannot be impleaded in the suit. The present suit has been filed by the petitioner on the basis of relationship of landlord and tenant and in