1. These are second appeals on behalf of the defendant in suits for ejectment on the ground of default in payment of rent. Various issues were taken in each of the suits in the first court. The first was whether the suit was maintainable; the second issue was whether there were defaults and the third was whether the notice to quit that was served was a good and proper notice. So far as the last two points are concerned both the courts came to the same finding that there were defaults and the notice to quit was served and it was a valid and good notice. The point that was urged here very seriously and the point on which there has been a difference of opinion so far as the courts below are concerned is whether the suit is maintainable or not.

2. The suit was instituted by Messrs. Gorak Nath Champalal Pandey described as a firm. There is no dispute that Gorak Nath and Champalal Pandey entered into a partnership orally. That partnership was registered and the names of two partners appear in the Register of Firms as Gorak Nath and Champalal Pandey. Subsequently one of them died but the heirs were not brought on the said register. In spite of the death, the firm is said to have