Aditya Nath Mittal, J.

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, learned counsel appearing for the opposite party no.14 and perused the record.

2. This writ petition has been filed with the prayer to issue a writ of certiorari for quashing the judgment and order dated 31.01.2011, passed by the opposite party no.1.

3. The brief facts of the case are that the petitioner (landlady) had filed the suit for ejectment, arrears of rent and damages against the opposite party no.14 and others on the ground that the said shop was taken on rent by Gauri Shanker in the name & Style of firm Gauri Shanker Shyam Behari. The opposite party no.14 being daughter's son was not entitled to inherit the tenancy rights but since he was alleging to be a partner of the firm Gauri Shanker Roop Narain, therefore, he has been arrayed as a party. It was alleged that the shop in dispute was not in the tenancy of any firm rather it was in a tenancy of Gauri Shanker in his individual capacity. The landlady was not residing at Faizabad as she was Lecturer in Jaipur. When she came to Faizabad, she came to know that the shop in dispute was partitioned, which has changed its nature and diminished its utility.