1. KARAM ELAHEE CHAUHAN, J.-Learned counsel argues that the High Court has failed to note that the Deputy Custodian by his orders dated 21-3-1957 (page 34) and dated 6-4-1968 (page 36) bad already granted a declaration that one-half of the land was non-evacuee property. He submits that these orders were legally operative in the field and should have been given effect to unless legally set aside which according to him was never done. He further submits that entries in the relevant Jamabandi which was in favour of the petitioner carried a presumption of truth under section 44 of Land Revenue Act and that there was no rebuttal to displace that presumption. On the other hand there rather existed, he submits, a correspon--ding mutation duly supporting the Jamabandi entries and showing that one, half of the land was non-evacuee property. Learned counsel submits that the failure to attend to the aforesaid factual and legal aspects of the matter has resulted in miscarriage of justice. The points inter alia raised require consideration. We consequently grant leave to appeal. Security Rs. 2,000.