Shri Narayan Shukla, J.:- 1. During pendency of writ petition the petitioner and the opposite party died and their legal heirs have been substituted in their places. 2. Heard Mr. S.K.Rastogi, learned counsel for the petitioners and Mr. Hari Om Singh, learned counsel for the opposite parties. 3. Petitioners have challenged the order dated 19th November,1998 passed by the Civil Judge (Senior Division),Small Cause Judge, Kheri in Small Cause Case No. 2/98, whereby the petitioner-defendant' application moved under section 23 of the Provincial small Cause courts Act. 1887 to return the plaints for filing a Suit before the court of competent of jurisdiction has been rejected. 4. Briefly the facts of the case are that the opposite parties filed a suit for ejectment as well as for recovery of arrears of rent against the petitioner/defendant, who raised question on the title of plaintiff-respondent with the submissions that plaintiff-respondent is not the owner of the property rather defendant raised some construction and also dig a well. The defendant further contended that earlier Mr. Ram Nivas instituted a suit for permanent injunction against Ram Lotan Dixit and others, which was registered as Original Suit No. 51 of 1975, decided on 21st December, 1981, in which the defendant's possession was found and the property in question was declared to one Sakura. The opposite party-plaintiff filed an objection against the said application and submitted that in the earlier suit the defendant through statement has admitted that the property belongs to plaintiff's father- in-law and defendant has also admitted that she is tenant of plaintiff's father-in-law. Now at this stage, it is not open for the defendant to raise the question on plaintiff's title. 5. Section 23 of the Act provides that notwithstanding anything in the foregoing portion of this Act, when the right of a plaintiff and the relief claimed by him in a Court of Small Causes depend upon the proof or disproof of a title to immovable property or other title which such a Court cannot finally determine, the Court may at any stage of the proceedings return the plaint to be presented to a court having jurisdiction to determine the title. 6. In support of his contentions the learned counsel for the petitioners has cited the following Cases:- Shamim Akhtar Vs. Iqbal Ahmad and another, AIR, 2001 Supreme Court 1, Smt. Krishna Devi Vs. 6. In support of his contentions the learned counsel for the petitioners has cited the following Cases:- Shamim Akhtar Vs. Iqbal Ahmad and another, AIR, 2001 Supreme Court 1, Smt. Krishna Devi Vs. District Judge, Mathura and others ,Allahabad Rent Cases 1984, 506, Ram Jiwan Misra Vs. Smt. Kallo and another,Allahabad Rent Cases, 1980, 522 and Anurag Misra Vs. Ravindra Singh AIR 1994 Allahabad 174, in which it has been held that ?It is well settled also that an admission of a person is binding if the facts alleged to have been admitted on hi personal knowledge and not otherwise. The question relating to ownership is generally a mixed question of law and fact. A person may be owner of property having acquired himself or in other case by transfer of property from the real owner. A person may acquire title by inheritance and the like. Owership is a mixed question of law and fact and until and unless the plaintiff has alleged his mode of acquisition of property in dispute specifically as to how he acquired the property in the plaint vague allegation about owership cannot be deemed to have been admitted by the other side.? 7. Since the petitioner has already admitted that she was tenant of plaintiff's father-in-law, now at this stage when the suit has been instituted against her for eviction, she cannot raise question on the title on plaintiff. Moreover, it is not in dispute that she was not the owner of the property as she herself has submitted that it is different property, thus the case can be determined by the Small Cause Court itself as it is provided under section 23 of the Act, therefore, I do not find error in the order impugned. 8. The writ petition is dismissed.