S. P. SRIVASTAVA, J.

( 1 ) HEARD the learned counsel for the tenant/appellant.

( 2 ) SHRI A. M. Naik, learned counsel representing the respondents Nos. 1 and 2/ caveators has also been heard.

( 3 ) PERUSED the record.

( 4 ) THE tenant/appellant, has in this sec ond appeal challenged the judgment and de cree passed by the first appellate Court dismissing his appeal holding the same to have been abated after rejecting the applications filed by the present appellant under Order XXII, Rule 4 and under Order XXII, Rule 9 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (hereinafter referred to as the Code ).

( 5 ) THE suit giving rise to this appeal had been filed seeking eviction of the tenant/appellant from the accommodation in dispute by three plaintiffs. On the plaint allegations, out of these three plaintiffs the landlords, so far as the accommodation in dispute was concerned were only the plaintiffs Nos. 2 and 3.

( 6 ) THE learned counsel for the tenant/ appellant has not disputed the aforesaid fact.

( 7 ) THE trial Court had decreed the suit as prayed for.

( 8 ) FEELING aggrieved by the decree of the trial Court, the tenant had filed a first appeal challenging the decree, of the trial Court

Click Here to Read the rest of this document