Horwill, J.

1. It has been proved to the satisfaction of the Courts below that the contesting defendants 3 to 5 executed a lease deed Ex. A in favour of the plaintiffs father in 1906 for a period of three years. There is also abundant evidence that the defendants have been in possession since then up to the date of suit; and there is no evidence to suggest that the defendants were ever out of possession. There is also no evidence that the defendants ever paid any rent either to the appellant or to the plaintiffs father and his brothers. The trial Court found on these facts that as it must be presumed that defendants 3 to 5 continued in possession as tenants of the plaintiff, the possession remained with the plaintiff, at any rate until 1923, when the plaintiff brought a suit on a lease deed which was found to be not genuine. It therefore decreed the suit in the plaintiffs favour. In appeal it was held that the plaintiff had not been in possession within twelve years and that the suit had there, fore to fail. Unfortunately the question whether the possession of the defendants was a possession by virtue of the relation, ship of landlord and tenant existing between them was not