JUDGMENT This Rule was obtained by the tenant defendants on a revisional application disputing the validity of an order dated February 23, 1913, passed by the learned Chief Judge, City Civil Court, Calcutta, in Ejeotment Suit No. 823 of 1968. By the order impugned the learned judge has overruled the plea taken by the defendants that the suit as framed is not maintainable in the absence of the Subtenant. I have no manner of doubt that the learned judge has rightly dismissed the objection. If the position of the sub-tenant is such that he has independent rights under the West Bengal Premises Tenancy Act, he would not be bound by the decree and as such he is not a necessary party. If on the other hand he has no independent right he will be bound by the decree that may be passed against the tenant but even then he not a necessary party. In this view, I am of the opinion that the application that was filed on rejection whereof a Rule having been obtained from this Court the ejectment suit could no stayed successfully for five years was not a bonafide application at all. 2. This application, therefore, fails and the Rule is discharged. The order passed by the learned Chief Judge is affirmed. The opposite parties are entitled to costs. Hearing fee is assessed at 10 (ten) Gold Mohurs. 3. Let the records be sent down forthwith by a Special Messenger at the costs of this Court.