PARVEZ AHMAD, J.- The petitioners have assailed the order of the Appellate Court by virtue of which the appeal filed by the respondent/defendant was partly accepted and the judgment of the Trial Court was modified.
2. The facts in brief are that the present petitioners brought a suit for recovery of amount with the assertion .That the respondent/defendant was in possession of the properly as a lessee and had failed to make payment of the lease amount totally Rs. 15,537.50. The respondent/defendant contested the suit and the Trial Court after framing of issues and recording of evidence of the parties decreed the suit in favour of the petitioners. However, the respondent/defendant filed an appeal before the Appellate Court from where it was modified and decretal sum was reduced to Rs. 9,000/- The petitioners with this back-ground have assailed the legality and validity of the order of the Appellate Court.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioners has been heard. None on behalf of the respondent has appeared in response to pre-admission notice. As such the entire record has also been perused.
4. When the respondent/defendant himself appeared as his own witness as D.W 2, he in cross- examination admitted that the petitioners have not filed any suit for recovery of money for the lease period which has been paid by him. This clearly amounts that the suit filed by the petitioners is with regard to the lease money which had not been paid by the respondent/defendant and as such the suit of the petitioners/plaintiffs was. Liable to be decreed for the entire .Amount and scanning the judgment of the Appellate Court in this context it is not liable to be maintained. As such this revision petition is allowed. The impugned judgment and decree of the Appellate Court is hereby set aside and that of the Trial Court is maintained. No order as to costs.