O R D E R

KOSHY,J.

Revision petitioners herein were the respondents in R.C.P.NO.10/1996. The building scheduled to the application consists of two shop rooms in the ground floor and two other rooms in the first floor and two other rooms with pent roof. The landlord wanted eviction contending that he earlier shifted his residence with family to Karnataka for education for his children. Since the education of children was over, they want to come back and they wanted to reside in part of the building and use other part of the building to conduct grossery business. He filed a single application to evict different tenants occupying different rooms in the same building. Revision petitioners denied the bona fide need and also contended that it cannot be used as a residential place. They also claimed benefit of second proviso to Section 11(3). They also contended that C.R.P.1864/2001 2 under Section 11(3), petition cannot be filed jointly against different tenants as there is misjoinder of cause of action. They have taken the objection in the written statement itself. In Sultan v. Mohanan (2000 (3) KLT 338) it was held by a Division Bench of this Court that a single petition can be filed aga