1. It is admitted that T. N. Bhaskar was not the person who had let Smt. Hakim into possession of the accommodation as a tenant. In fact she was inducted as a tenant by one Mathuradas. For certain income-tax recoveries, the house was attached. Mathuradas died leaving behind, as per defendant, at least four heirs. One of them by name Kasturilal with the permission of the Income tax authorities, sold the house to T. N. Bhaskar. This is how, T. N. Bhaskar claimed ownership over the house.

2. The trial Court did not frame specific issues on these pleadings of the defendant. A grievance was made about it but the Court refused to add issues. The defendant, therefore, came up in revision.

Held : The principal question in a suit for ejectment between landlord and tenant is the relationship created by contract or by operation of law. But where the plaintiff claims through derivative title, the defendant-tenant is not estopped from showing that the title is not really in the plaintiff but in some other persons or that the derivative title acquired by the plaintiff is defective for some reason.

3. The learned trial Court has in fact omitted to frame certain vital issues, say about th