( 1 ) THESE two appeals are connected with each other and the undisputed facts which have given rise to them are as follows:-On the 21st August 1923, Lala Fateh Chand and Lala Chatter Sen (appellants in Appeal No. 2041 of 1948 and respondents in Appeal No. 2250 of 1946, who shall be referred to hereinafter as defendants) obtained a lease of the premises in dispute from one Lala Devi Prasad. The landlord served a notice of eviction on the tenants and filed a suit for ejectment and recovery of arrears of rent. The defendants pleaded inter alia that a part of the property from which their ejectment was claimed belonged to them and not to the plaintiff. They also pleaded that the notice of eviction was invalid. This latter contention was accepted by the Court and the suit for ejectment was dismissed. Lala Devi Prasad, the ori-ginal landlord, then died sometime after 1942 leaving his widow, Srimati Asharfi Devi and two sons Brij Bhushan Prakash and Kirti Bhushan prakash. Under the Hindu Womens Rights to Property Act (Act XV1i1 of 1937), the widow on the death of her husband obtained a share in the leased property equal to that of her sons. The two sons then served a fresh