D. P. SARKAR, J. ( 1 ) THIS Judgment governs C. O. Nos. 679/1995, 680/ 1995,682/1995 ad 683/1995 arising out of the same facts and circumstances and the petitioner-plaintiffs being identical in all the four cases. ( 2 ) THE petitioners are trustees appointed by the Court of learned District Judge, 24-Parganas in Suit No. 16/1987 in respect of the property including the temple and its deities and other adjoining properties popularly known as Kantha Dhari Math situated at 7, Roy Mathura Nath Chowdhury Street within Baranagar P. S. The name of the Math borrows its origin from the fact that Mahapravu Chaitanya Deva passed a night in that Math and was kind to leave behind his 'kantha' used by him in that Math. ( 3 ) ALL the cases arises out of Title Suits for eviction of the tenant/opposite Parties. The members of the Trust Board instituted separate suit against five tenants. But during the pendency of those suits, the opposite Party Nos. 2 to 5 filed petitions before the learned. Munsif where the suits are pending, for adding them as party/defendants setting tip conflicting title to the Trust properly and also challenging the creation and legality of the Trust on the ground that the present members of the Trust Board by practising fraud on the Court obtained the decree for creation of the Trust and for their appointment as members of the Board of Trust. The learned Munsif allowed their prayers. ( 4 ) ON being aggrieved by such order passed by the learned Munsif on 7. 12. 94 the present Revisional Cases have been filed. ( 5 ) THE learned Advocate for the petitioners is present and has made his submission challenging the impugned order dated 7. 12. 94. Inspite of proper service none appeared for the opposite parties. Naturally, the matter is heard ex-parte without depending on the vagaries of the opposite parties. ( 6 ) ALL the four suits were filed for eviction of premises tenants under the scheme included in the Trust document which is made part of the decree, the power to realise rent from the tenants and to take even legal action for their eviction etc. was given to the members of the Trust Board. So, there is nothing wrong for the petitioners to file suits for eviction. was given to the members of the Trust Board. So, there is nothing wrong for the petitioners to file suits for eviction. But the question raised before this Court is whether the act of the learned Munsif in allowing the petition of the Opposite Party numbers 2 to 5 for their addition as parties to the suits is legal or not. ( 7 ) THE tenant landlord relationship is a contractual relationship. It is not always necessary that the landlord should be the owner of the premises let out. The main test of such relationship is the payment and acceptance of rent by the parties. The nature of such suits for eviction of premises tenant is quite different from the nature of complicated Title, Suit involving knotty questions of title. So, a suit for eviction of a premises tenant should not be turned into a complicated Title Suit. In the instant cases the opposite party numbers 2 to 5 have raised the plea that the order passed by the Court relating to the Trust is badinlaw as it was obtained by practising fraud on the Court. Secondly, opposite party numbers 2 to 5 claim to be the sons and daughters of one of the deceased Sevait, Gour Mohan Bose. ( 8 ) THE petition under section 92 of the CPC was filed before the learned District judge on the grounds that the original Sevaits of that Math were all dead. On strenuous search only two old widows could be traced out and one of them also expired by that time. Naturally, the Seva Puja of the deities came to a halt and the religious minded people of the locality applied for creation of a Board of Trust for looking after daily Seva Puja and the maintenance of the property of the deities. Now, if the prayer of the Opposite Party numbers 2 to 5 be allowed, It will unsettle the settled fact and make the simple fact very much complicated. The very purpose of the Eviction Suit will be defeated and delayed. It is alleged by the petitioners that opposite party numbers 2 to 5 have been set up by the individual tenant to make the suit for eviction infractuous. There is no immediate loss to the opposite party numbers 2 to 5 even if they are Sevaits in the line of Gour Mohan Bose. It is alleged by the petitioners that opposite party numbers 2 to 5 have been set up by the individual tenant to make the suit for eviction infractuous. There is no immediate loss to the opposite party numbers 2 to 5 even if they are Sevaits in the line of Gour Mohan Bose. Accordingly, if their claim succeeds they will have to maintain Seva Puja and meet the maintenance cost of the temple etc. The income from the properties should be spent for the benefit of the deities. The deities are perpetual minors in the eye of law and definitely the Court has the power to consider the supreme benefit of the deities, on whose hand the overall interest of the deities will remain protected. So, to add the Opposite party numbers 2 to 5, in my opinion, has absolutely turned the simple suit for eviction into a complicated Title Suit is not desirable. If the Board of Trust and the scheme under which it was framed are given the legal sanction by a Decree of the Court, mere challenge to that decree as obtained by fraud should not be entertained in a Suit for eviction. A Title Suit is necessary to be filed. The Opposite party numbers 2 to 5 are simply surplusages. The very purpose of the eviction suits is likely to be defeated by the impugned order. So, in the interest of justice the impugned order is held to be illegal and it is set aside. ( 9 ) LEARNED lower Court is directed to dispose of the pending eviction suits as expeditiously as possible. Petition allowed