V.K.Jhanji, J.

1. This is landlords revision directed against the order of the appellate Authority, who reversed the order of the Rent Controller vide which the tenant was ordered to be ejected on the ground of sub letting.

2. The petitioner in his ejectment petition claimed ejectment of the respondents on the ground that respondents No. 1 to 3 have sublet/ tiansferred their tenancy rights in favour of respondents No. 4 and 5 without the knowledge of the petitioner in writing.

3. The petition was contested by the respondents No. 1 and 4 who in their written statement denied that respondents No. 1 to 3 have sub-let the premises to respondents No. 4 and 5. They rather stated that previously Shri Banwari Lal, father of respondent No. 1 to 3 had been doing business in the shop in question as partner with respondent No. 4 under a regular partnership deed and after the death of Banwari Lal, business of partnership was continued by respondents No. 1 and 4 in the same shop under a partnership-deed dated 29th of December, 1977. They further stated that respondent No. 5 has nothing to do with the shop in dispute or the business co ducted therein. The ejectment of the tenants was also