In the case of Kalyan Kumar Bera Vs. Milan
Kumar Khutia and Others (supra), the facts are that
defendants are five trespassers. The plaintiff has filed suit
for possession only against one trespasser. Therefore, in
this context it was held that the suit for possession only
against one trespasser is not maintainable and effective
decree could not have been passed without impleading
other trespassers. Here the facts and circumstances in the
present case are different from the above stated case. In
the present case, the appellant is not trespasser, but
appellant and tenant are lessees and they have commonly
inherited through their father. Therefore, above cited
judgment is also not applicable to the present case.
In the case of Kalyan Kumar Bera Vs. Milan
Kumar Khutia and Others (supra), the facts are that
defendants are five trespassers. The plaintiff has filed suit
for possession only against one trespasser. Therefore, in
this context it was held that the suit for possession only
against one trespasser is not maintainable and effective
decree could not have been passed without impleading
other trespassers. Here the facts and circumstances in the
present case are different from the above stated case. In
the present case, the appellant is not trespasser, but
appellant and tenant are lessees and they have commonly
inherited through their father. Therefore, above cited
judgment is also not applicable to the present case.