HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD MATTERS UNDER ARTICLE 227 No. - 11646 of 2025 Court No. - 36 HON'BLE ROHIT RANJAN AGARWAL, J. 1. This petition has been filed at the behest of son of one Babu Ram Jain and Late Ashok Kumar Jain who are said to be stranger to the suit. The suit for eviction on the ground of arrears of rent and subletting was filed by plaintiff-respondent nos. 1 to 4 against respondent no. 5. Order of eviction as well as for arrears of rent was passed in S.C.C. Suit No. 48 of 2017 on 15.05.2023. Two revisions were filed, one by petitioners being S.C.C. Revision No. 84 of 2023 and the second by Pawan Kumar Jain being S.C.C. Revision No. 85 of 2023. Both the revisions were heard together and decided by common order dated 21.08.2025 by which both the revisions were dismissed. 2. From perusal of material on record, it transpires that husband of respondent no. 1 had constructed two shops, one was let out to one Pradeep Jain and the other to Pawan Kumar Jain which is evident from the entries made in the register of Nagar Nigam for the assessment year 1986-91. As there was default in payment of rent and shop was sublet by Pawan Kumar Jain to his brother Ashok Kumar Jain, S.C.C. suit was filed which was decreed, thereafter, revision was filed which was also dismissed. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner has emphasised that shop in question has not been sublet by Pawan Kumar Jain to father of petitioners and in fact they are tenants of the said shop. He further submits that already an application has been moved by Pawan Kumar Jain for expunging his name from the municipal records in the year 2019. Versus Counsel for Petitioner(s) : Ayyaz Khan, Vivek Kumar Shukla Counsel for Respondent(s) : Sharad Kumar Pandey Sheetal Prasad And Another .....Petitioner(s) Smt. Anita Jain And 4 Others .....Respondent(s) 4. Counsel appearing for the contesting respondents submits that it is a case of subletting and arrears of rent. 5. Having heard learned counsel for the parties and perusing the material on record, I find that the entries in the municipal records are reflective of the fact that name of two tenants of Late Sukhpal Chand Jain that is Pradeep Jain and Pawan Kumar Jainwere were entered in the municipal records in the year 1990. Nothing was placed before the trial court to demonstrate the fact that name of Pawan Kumar Jain was wrongly entered in the municipal records. It was after filing of S.C.C. suit that an application was moved by Pawan Kumar Jain in the year 2019 for expunging his name. Apart from this fact, nothing has been brought on record by tenant before the trial court to demonstrate that he was not in default of rent and the shop was not sublet to his brother, Ashok Kumar Jain. The revisional authority has recorded concurrent finding of fact and has dismissed both revisions filed by petitioners as well as Pawan Kumar Jain. 6. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, I find that no case for interference is made out once the finding has been recorded by both courts below as to name of Pawan Kumar Jain having been recorded in the municipal records as the tenant of Sukhpal Chand Jain who has sublet the property to his brother Ashok Kumar Jain and was in arrears of rent. 7. Writ petition fails and is hereby dismissed. 8. After the petition was dismissed, counsel for petitioner submits that some time may be granted for vacating the premises in question. 9. In view of said fact, six months' time is granted for vacating the premises subject to undertaking being given by petitioners before court below, within a period of one week from today. October 8, 2025 V.S.Singh A227 No. 11646 of 2025 2 (Rohit Ranjan Agarwal,J.) Digitally signed by :- VIDYA SAGAR SINGH High Court of Judicature at Allahabad