1. NASIM HASAN SHAH, J.--The petition for ejectment filed by the predecessor-in-interest of the petitioners herein has failed on the ground that the Courts below were of the view that the latter had not been able to establish that respondent No. 1 was his tenant.
2. The fundamental issue in connection with the question whether the relationship of landlord and tenant existed between the parties was whether respondent No. 1 had executed the rent deed in question. The Rent Controller had held that he had done so, but the Additional District Judge and the High Court without adverting to this question thought it fit to discard the rent deed on the ground that there were discrepancies in the evidence of the landlord on the point as to place of its execution and some such other defects.
3. We feel that the above circumstances were hardly of any significance if it was found that the respondents had indeed executed the rent deed. .
4. The case requires further consideration.
5. Security Rs. 2,500.
6. M. Z. M.