GHULAM QADIR Versus MEMBER (REVENUE), BOARD-OF REVENUE, PUNJAB

ORDER

SAAD SAOOD JAN, J.‑‑ The petitioners purchased agricultural land which was being cultivated by a number of tenants. The tenants brought a joint suit for pre‑emption. The suit was decreed by the Collector. However, on appeal by the petitioners, the Additional Com missioner set aside the decree of the Collector on the ground that the suit suffered from misjoinder of causes (if action inasmuch as the tenants should have brought separate suits for the enforcement of their individual rights. The tenants filed a revision petition before the Board of Revenue. A learned Member accepted the revision petition, set aside the judgment of the Additional Commissioner and restored the decree of the Collector. The petitioners invoked the constitutional jurisdiction of the High Court to call in question the legality of the order of the learned Member but without any success. They now seek leave to appeal from this Court.

2. It is urged on behalf of the petitioners that the suit of the tenants was bad on account of misjoinder of causes of action and therefore it should have been dismissed. This contention is without any merit for Rule 1 of Order I, Civil Procedure Code, permits all persons to join in one suit as plaintiffs in whom any right to relief in respect of or arising out of the same act or transaction or series of acts or transactions is alleged to exist, where if such persons brought separate suits any common question of law or fact would arise. The present case is clearly covered by this Rule. We are therefore unable to accept the contention of the learned counsel. The petition is dismissed.

M.B.A./G‑100/S Petition dismissed.