JAGAT NARAYAN, J.—This is a revision application by Pannalal defendant No. 3, against an order of the Civil Judge, Bikaner, holding that the additional written statement filed by him should have been confined to the amended portion of the plaint only.

2. The case of the plaintiffs is that they let out a shop to Nemichand, defendant No. 1, and that the latter sub-let it to his nephews defendant No. 2 and 3, who are now carrying on business in the shop. The suit was instituted in 1965 for the ejectment of all the 3 defendants from the shop.

3. Defendants No. 2 and 3 contested the suit on the ground that Nemichand was still carrying on business in the shop and he had not parted with possession in their favour, The plaintiffs examined an Inspector of the Food Department, who stated that a shop was being run in the premises in suit under the name and style of Kedarnath Pannalal. Kedarnath and Pannalal, defendants No. 2 and 3 then applied for an amendment of the written statement so as to put forward the case that Nemi Chand surrendered the tenancy in 1957 and the shop was let out to them as tenants in chief on the same terms on which Nemichand was holding it. This amendment was disallowed

Click Here to Read the rest of this document