both the persons are not necessary and admittedly, Onkardutt passed away on 10.10.1981, Gyandutt attained the age of majority, therefore, he became sole owner of the property by virtue of the trust deed dated 22.9.1973. It is further stated that as per Page No.23 of the judgment, two witnesses produced on behalf of the plaintiff and ten witnesses produced on behalf of the defendants and after hearing both the parties, the impugned judgment was correctly passed by the learned trial court in favour of the plaintiff and against the defendant. It is rightly held that since after March, 1983, the rent was received by Gyanprakash and the rent receipts were issued and therefore, he is only landlord for defendants no.2 & 3. Another aspect in this finding is also correct that in Civil Suit No.44/1982, which was filed by Devkishan in the court of Civil Judge, Bikaner on 26.07.1982, for arrears of rent and eviction and in that suit, written statement was filed by the defendants on 09.03.1983 and in that written statement, it is admitted that Gyanprakash is landlord of the disputed property and attornment was made in favour of Gyanprakash and due rent was determined on 18.05.1983 and in that suit and as per determination, due rent till date was Rs.5629.50 but the same was not deposited by tenant and the defence was struck-off . Since the rent from 01.04.1983 was not paid to Gyanprakash, one suit for eviction and arrears of rent was instituted by Gyanprakash against the tenant, which was registered as Civil Suit No.80/1983, in that suit, ex parte proceedings were initiated against the tenants no.2 & 3 on 25.10.1983. One inter-pleader suit was registered as Civil Suit No.57/1983, which was filed by the defendants-tenants and since
